[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45758-45800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17967]



[[Page 45757]]

Vol. 80

Friday,

No. 147

July 31, 2015

Part III





Department of Energy





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





10 CFR Parts 429 and 431





Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Refrigerated Bottled or 
Canned Beverage Vending Machines; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 80 , No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 45758]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431

[Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0045]
RIN 1904-AD07


Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Refrigerated 
Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On August 11, 2014, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued 
a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to amend the test procedure for 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines (beverage 
vending machines or BVMs). That proposed rulemaking serves as the basis 
for the final rule. In this final rule, DOE is reorganizing its test 
procedure for beverage vending machines into an Appendix A, which will 
be mandatory for equipment testing beginning 180 days after the final 
rule is published in the Federal Register, and an Appendix B, which 
will be mandatory for equipment testing to demonstrate compliance with 
any amended energy conservation standards arising out of DOE's ongoing 
BVM energy conservation standards rulemaking. Specifically, Appendix A 
includes amendments that update the referenced test method to ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, eliminate the requirement to test at the 
90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition, establish a provision for 
testing at the lowest application product temperature, and adopt 
several amendments and clarifications to the DOE test procedure to 
improve the repeatability and remove ambiguity from the current BVM 
test procedure, as established by DOE in the 2006 BVM test procedure 
final rule. Appendix B contains all the amendments included in Appendix 
A and, in addition, incorporates provisions to account for the impact 
of low power modes on measured daily energy consumption (DEC). Finally, 
DOE is adopting in this final rule several clarifications regarding the 
certification and reporting requirements for beverage vending machines.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is August 31, 2015. Compliance 
with Appendix A to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 will be mandatory for 
representations made on or after January 27, 2016. Compliance with 
Appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 will be mandatory for 
representations made on or after the compliance date of any amended 
energy conservation standards. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022). DOE 
will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the 
compliance date for Appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431. The 
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule 
was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of August 31, 
2015.

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public 
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting 
documents/materials, is available for review at regulations.gov. All 
documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index. 
However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing 
information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly 
available.
    A link to the docket Web page can be found at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx/productid/24. This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this 
document on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov Web page will 
contain simple instructions on how to access all documents, including 
public comments, in the docket.
    For further information on how to review the docket, contact Ms. 
Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email: 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
Ms. Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 586-6590, Email: 
[email protected].
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1777, Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule incorporates by reference 
into 10 CFR part 431 the testing methods contained in the following 
commercial standards:
    (1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, ``Methods of Testing for Rating 
Vending Machines for Sealed Beverages,'' approved July 23, 2010.
    Copies of ASHRAE standards may be purchased from the American 
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers; 1791 
Tullie Circle NE., Atlanta, GA 30329, 404-636-8400, or www.ashrae.org.
    See section IV.N. for additional information on this standard.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
    A. Appendix A: Clarifications and Amendments to the DOE Test 
Procedure
    1. Updating the Referenced Test Method
    2. Other Minor Clarifications and Amendments to ASHRAE 32.1-2010
    3. Eliminating Testing at the 90 [deg]F Ambient Test Condition
    4. Test Procedure for Combination Vending Machines
    5. Loading of BVM Models When Conducting the DOE Test Procedure
    6. Specifying the Characteristics of the Standard Product
    7. Clarifying the Next-To-Vend Beverage Temperature Test 
Condition
    8. Defining ``Fully Cooled''
    9. Placement of Thermocouples During Testing
    10. Establishing Testing Provisions at the Lowest Application 
Product Temperature
    11. Treatment of Certain Accessories During Testing
    B. Appendix B: Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions To 
Account for Low Power Modes
    1. Definitions Related to the Low Power Mode Test Procedure
    2. Low Power Mode Test Method
    3. Refrigeration Low Power Mode Verification Test Protocol
    C. Other Amendments and Clarifications
    1. Clarifications to the Scope of the BVM Regulations
    2. Clarifications to Certification and Reporting Requirements
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    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 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
    N. Description of Standards Incorporated by Reference
    V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

[[Page 45759]]

I. Authority and Background

A. Authority

    Title III, Part B \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 
1975 (``EPCA'' or ``the Act''), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, 
as codified) established the ``Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Products Other Than Automobiles.'' \2\ These include refrigerated 
bottled or canned beverage vending machines (``beverage vending 
machines'' or BVMs), the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6295(v)) 
\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
    \2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, 
Public Law 114-11 (Apr. 30, 2015).
    \3\ Because Congress included beverage vending machines in Part 
A of Title III of EPCA, the consumer product provisions of Part A 
(not the industrial equipment provisions of Part A-1) apply to 
beverage vending machines. DOE placed the regulatory requirements 
specific to beverage vending machines in Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR), part 431, ``Energy Efficiency Program for 
Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment'' as a matter of 
administrative convenience based on their type and will refer to 
beverage vending machines as ``equipment'' throughout this document 
because of their placement in 10 CFR part 431. Despite the placement 
of beverage vending machines in 10 CFR part 431, the relevant 
provisions of Title A of EPCA and 10 CFR part 430, which are 
applicable to all product types specified in Title A of EPCA, are 
applicable to beverage vending machines. See 74 FR 44914, 44917 
(Aug. 31, 2009). In this test procedure final rule, DOE is 
clarifying the relevant authority for beverage vending machines by 
modifying 10 CFR 431.291 to specify that the regulatory provisions 
of 10 CFR 430.33 and 430.34 and subparts D and E of 10 CFR part 430 
are applicable to beverage vending machines. DOE notes that because 
the procedures in Parts 430 and 431 for petitioning DOE for 
obtaining a test procedure waiver are substantively the same (79 FR 
26591, 26601(May 9, 2014)), the regulations for applying for a test 
procedure waiver for beverage vending machines are those found at 10 
CFR 431.401 rather than those found at 430.27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation 
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. The 
Secretary or the Federal Trade Commission, as appropriate, may 
prescribe labeling requirements for beverage vending machines. (42 
U.S.C. 6294(a)(5)(A)) The testing requirements consist of test 
procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis 
for (1) certifying to DOE that their products comply with the 
applicable energy conservation standards adopted under EPCA, and (2) 
making representations about the efficiency of those products. 
Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the 
products comply with any relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.
    EPCA requires the test procedure for beverage vending machines to 
be based on ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15)) In 
addition, 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 that any test procedures prescribed 
or amended under this section shall be reasonably designed to produce 
test results that 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)) EPCA also provides that the 
Secretary of Energy (Secretary) shall review test procedures for all 
covered products at least once every 7 years, and either amend the test 
procedures (if the Secretary determines that amended test procedures 
would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements of 42 
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) or publish a determination in the Federal Register 
not to amend them. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
    In addition, if DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is 
warranted, it must publish the proposed test procedure and offer the 
public an opportunity to present oral and written comments on it. (42 
U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) Finally, in any rulemaking to amend a test 
procedure, DOE must determine to what extent, if any, the proposed test 
procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency of any covered 
product as determined under the existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(e)(1))
    Pursuant to DOE's obligations under EPCA, DOE reviewed the BVM test 
procedure at 10 CFR 431.294 and determined that the test procedure 
could be amended to improve the accuracy of the test procedure for 
beverage vending machines and to incorporate new technology features. 
As such, on August 11, 2014, DOE published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NOPR) proposing amendments to its test procedure (2014 BVM 
test procedure NOPR). 79 FR 46908. These proposed amendments were 
presented at the BVM test procedure NOPR public meeting held on 
September 16, 2014. DOE received written and verbal comments in 
response to the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR at the NOPR public meeting 
as well as throughout the comment period. The amendments adopted in 
this final rule respond to and reflect upon those comments.
    This final 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.
    DOE also reviewed the adopted amendments to determine whether they 
would have an impact on the measured energy consumption of covered 
beverage vending machines. DOE has determined that the test procedure 
amendments incorporating provisions to account for low power modes will 
change the measured energy use of beverage vending machines when 
compared to the current BVM test procedure, as established by DOE in 
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule (subsequent references to DOE's 
``current test procedure'' for beverage vending machines in this 
document refer to the test procedure established by DOE in the 2006 BVM 
test procedure final rule as it existed at 10 CFR 431.294 in the 
edition of 10 CFR parts 200 to 499 revised as of January 1, 2015). 
Therefore, DOE is considering the impacts of these changes as part of 
its standards rulemaking for beverage vending machines (``BVM energy 
conservation standards rulemaking,'' Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022) 
and will not require use of these test procedure provisions (contained 
in Appendix B) until the compliance date of any amended standards set 
as a result of that rulemaking.

B. Background

    EPCA requires the test procedure for beverage vending machines to 
be based on American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American 
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers 
(ASHRAE) Standard 32.1-2004 (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004), ``Methods 
of Testing for Rating Vending Machines for Bottled, Canned or Other 
Sealed Beverages.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15)) In December 2006, DOE 
published a final rule establishing a test procedure for beverage 
vending machines, among other products and equipment (the 2006 BVM test 
procedure final rule). 71 FR 71340, 71355 (Dec. 8, 2006). In that final 
rule, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15), DOE adopted ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2004 as the DOE test procedure, except that DOE modified 
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 to require parties to test equipment 
with dual nameplate voltages at the lower of the two voltages only. 71 
FR at 71355.
    ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 specifies a method for determining 
the capacity of vending machines, referred to as ``vendible capacity,'' 
which is

[[Page 45760]]

essentially the maximum number of standard sealed beverages a vending 
machine can hold for sale. In the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, 
however, DOE adopted the ``refrigerated volume'' measure in section 
5.2, ``Refrigerated Volume Calculation,'' of ANSI/Association of Home 
Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) HRF-1-2004 (ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004) in 
addition to the ``vendible capacity'' measure, as referred to in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004. 71 FR at 71355. DOE adopted ``refrigerated 
volume'' as the primary measure of capacity for beverage vending 
machines because of the variety of dispensing mechanisms and storage 
arrangements among similar machines that may lead to potentially 
different refrigerated volumes for different machines with the same 
vendible capacity. In addition, EPCA has historically used upper limits 
on energy use as a function of volume for the purposes of establishing 
energy conservation standards for refrigeration equipment. Id.
    In the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, DOE determined that 
section 5.2 of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, which addresses the measurement of 
refrigerated volume in household freezers, is also applicable to 
beverage vending machines and is more appropriate than the language for 
measurement of volume in household refrigerators of section 4.2 of 
ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004. Specifically, section 5.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2004 includes provisions for specific compartments and features 
that are typically found in beverage vending machines, which are 
similar to compartments and features found in freezers. Therefore, DOE 
adopted ``refrigerated volume'' in lieu of ``vendible capacity'' as the 
dimensional metric for beverage vending machines in the 2006 BVM test 
procedure final rule. Id.
    Since the publication of the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, 
ASHRAE and AHAM have both published updated test standards. The most 
recent edition of the ASHRAE 32.1 test method is ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2010, which includes changes that align ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 with the nomenclature and methodology used in the 2006 BVM test 
procedure final rule (71 FR at 71355) and the 2009 BVM energy 
conservation standards final rule (74 FR 44914 (Aug. 31, 2009)). The 
most recent version of the AHAM HRF-1 test standard, AHAM HRF-1-2008, 
changes and reorganizes some sections for simplicity and usability, 
including the section relevant to measuring refrigerated volume of 
beverage vending machines.
    DOE reviewed these updated industry standards and proposed in the 
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR to, among other things, incorporate by 
reference ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, with minor modifications, as the DOE 
test procedure for beverage vending machines, for both determining 
daily energy consumption (DEC) and refrigerated volume. Specifically, 
DOE proposed to adopt Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 for 
determining refrigerated volume and proposed to remove ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-
2004 from the documents incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 431.293. 79 
FR 46908, 46911-46912 (Aug. 11, 2014). In addition to updating the BVM 
test procedure to incorporate by reference the latest industry 
standards, DOE also proposed a number of other amendments to clarify 
DOE's BVM regulations, remove ambiguity from the BVM test procedure, 
and adopt provisions to account for low power modes in the measured 
DEC. 79 FR 46908.

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule

    This final rule amends the DOE test procedure for beverage vending 
machines to clarify and remove ambiguity from the procedure, as well as 
incorporate several amendments that account for updated industry test 
methods and new equipment features. This final rule also reorganizes 
the DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines into an Appendix A 
to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431, which will be mandatory for 
representations made starting 180 days after the final rule is 
published in the Federal Register, and an Appendix B, that will be 
mandatory for equipment testing to demonstrate compliance with any 
amended energy conservation standards adopted as a result of the BVM 
energy conservation standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-
0022)
    Appendix A includes amendments that (1) update the referenced test 
method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, (2) incorporate amendments to 
clarify several ambiguities in the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, (3) 
eliminate the requirement to test at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test 
condition, (4) clarify the test procedure for combination vending 
machines, (5) clarify the requirements for loading of BVM units under 
the DOE test procedure, (6) specify the characteristics of a standard 
test package, (7) clarify the average next-to-vend beverage temperature 
test condition, (8) specify placement of thermocouples during the DOE 
test procedure, (9) establish provisions for testing at the lowest 
application product temperature, (10) clarify the treatment of certain 
accessories during the DOE test procedure, and (11) clarify the 
certification and reporting requirements for covered beverage vending 
machines. DOE has concluded that these amendments will serve to clarify 
the test procedure. As such, and as noted above, these clarifications 
and amendments are mandatory for representations made starting 180 days 
after the final rule is published in the Federal Register, and 
manufacturers will be required to use Appendix A to demonstrate 
compliance with existing energy conservation standards for beverage 
vending machines after that date. If desired, manufacturers may elect 
to begin using Appendix A on the effective date of this final rule, 30 
days after publication in the Federal Register, instead of the existing 
BVM test procedure requirements in 10 CFR 431.294 as it appeared in the 
10 CFR parts 200 to 499 edition revised as of January 1, 2015.
    Appendix B includes all provisions of Appendix A, as well as 
provisions to account for the impact of low power modes on the measured 
DEC of beverage vending machines. Appendix B is intended to be used to 
demonstrate compliance with any amended energy conservation standards 
for beverage vending machines established as part of the parallel BVM 
energy conservation standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-
0022) Manufacturers will be required to use the test procedure adopted 
in Appendix B to demonstrate compliance with any future DOE energy 
conservation standards for beverage vending machines, as well as for 
labeling or other representations as to the energy use of refrigerated 
beverage vending machines, beginning on the compliance date of any 
final rule establishing amended energy conservation standards for 
beverage vending machines.
    Prior to the compliance date of any such amended energy 
conservation standards, manufacturers must continue to use the test 
procedure found in Appendix A to demonstrate compliance with existing 
DOE energy conservation standards and for representations concerning 
the energy use of refrigerated beverage vending machines. However, 
manufacturers may elect to use the amended test procedure in Appendix B 
established as a result of this rulemaking to demonstrate compliance 
with any future, amended standards prior to the compliance date of such 
standards. Manufacturers who choose to use the amended test procedure 
in Appendix B early must

[[Page 45761]]

ensure that their equipment satisfies any applicable amended energy 
conservation standards established as a result of the BVM energy 
conservation standards rulemaking. In other words, a manufacturer may 
elect to use the test procedure in Appendix B prior to the established 
compliance date of any amended energy conservation standards to make 
representations with respect to the energy use of a basic model only if 
it also elects to certify compliance with the amended energy 
conservation standards.
    Finally, DOE is amending 10 CFR 429.52(b) with regard to reporting 
requirements for beverage vending machines, including a clarifying 
amendment that the reported energy consumption value for beverage 
vending machines is based on the DEC measured in accordance with the 
test procedure. Similarly, DOE is amending the introductory language 
found in 10 CFR 431.296 to clarify the applicability of the DEC to the 
energy conservation standards listed in that section.

III. Discussion

    In this BVM final rule, DOE is adopting several amendments to 
subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 to (1) clarify the scope of DOE's BVM 
regulations, (2) incorporate several new definitions relevant to 
testing beverage vending machines, (3) update the industry test methods 
incorporated by reference into the DOE test procedure, (4) update and 
clarify DOE's test procedure for beverage vending machines, and (5) 
clarify the language describing the energy conservation standards for 
beverage vending machines for the purposes of reporting the DEC 
determined in accordance with the test procedure. DOE is also 
clarifying how the DEC measured in accordance with the test procedure 
is reported to DOE in accordance with 10 CFR 429.52(b). The amendments 
adopted in this final rule are summarized in Table III.1 and discussed 
in more detail in the subsequent sections of this final rule, as noted 
in the table.

    Table III.1--Summary of Amendments Adopted in this Final Rule, Their Location Within the Code of Federal
                            Regulations (CFR), and the Applicable Preamble Discussion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Applicable preamble
            CFR location                      Topic             Summary of amendments           discussion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR 429.52(b)...................  Reporting Requirements  Amend reporting              Section III.C.2.
                                                              requirements to reflect
                                                              amendments incorporated in
                                                              Appendices A and B.
10 CFR 431.291.....................  Scope.................  Clarify applicability of 10  Section III.C.1.
                                                              CFR 430.33 and 430.34 and
                                                              subparts D and E of 10 CFR
                                                              part 430 to beverage
                                                              vending machines.
10 CFR 431.292.....................  Definitions...........  Incorporate new definitions  Section III.A.7 and
                                                              pertinent to testing         III.A.10.
                                                              beverage vending machines.
10 CFR 431.293.....................  Incorporation by        Update industry standards    Section III.A.1.
                                      Reference.              incorporated by reference
                                                              in the DOE test procedure
                                                              to reflect the latest
                                                              versions.
10 CFR 431.294.....................  Test Procedure........  Reorganize BVM test          N/A.
                                                              procedure into Appendices
                                                              A and B (see below).
Appendix A to Subpart Q of Part 431  Test Procedure          Incorporate several minor    Section III.A.
                                      Applicable to Energy    amendments and
                                      Conservation            clarifications to improve
                                      Standards for which     the accuracy and remove
                                      Compliance was          ambiguity.
                                      Required as of August
                                      31, 2012.
Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 431  Test Procedure          Incorporate amendments       Section III.B.
                                      Applicable to Amended   included in Appendix A and
                                      Energy Conservation     provisions for measuring
                                      Standards Being         low power modes.
                                      Considered in a
                                      Related Rulemaking.
10 CFR 431.466.....................  Energy Conservation     Clarify the applicability    Section III.C.2.
                                      Standards.              of the DEC measured in
                                                              accordance with the test
                                                              procedure to the energy
                                                              conservation standards
                                                              listed in this section.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments discussed in the subsequent sections and adopted in 
this final rule also respond to and reflect comments by interested 
parties in response to the proposed amendments presented in the 2014 
BVM test procedure NOPR. 79 FR 46908 (Aug. 11, 2014).

A. Appendix A: Clarifications and Amendments to the DOE Test Procedure

    In order to clarify and remove ambiguity from the test procedure 
for beverage vending machines, DOE is amending subpart Q of 10 CFR part 
431 by moving most of the existing test procedure for beverage vending 
machines from 10 CFR 431.294 to a new Appendix A to subpart Q of 10 CFR 
part 431. In Appendix A, DOE is also incorporating amendments to 
clarify and update the current DOE test procedure for beverage vending 
machines in the following ways:
    (1) Updating the referenced test method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2010,
    (2) incorporating several additional amendments to clarify 
ambiguities in the ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 test method,
    (3) eliminating testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test 
condition,
    (4) clarifying the test procedure for combination vending machines,
    (5) clarifying the requirements for loading BVM models under the 
DOE test procedure,
    (6) clarifying the specifications of the standard product,
    (7) clarifying the next-to-vend beverage temperature test 
condition,
    (8) specifying placement of thermocouples during the DOE test 
procedure,
    (9) establishing testing provisions at the lowest application 
product temperature, and
    (10) clarifying the treatment of certain accessories when 
conducting the DOE test procedure.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also proposed a new

[[Page 45762]]

definition and optional test method for ``fully cooled.'' 79 FR 46908, 
46915-17 (Aug. 11, 2014). DOE discusses this issue in section III.A.8 
of this final rule. However, due to the complexity and scope of the 
comments received on this issue, DOE is electing to address the 
differentiation of Class A and Class B equipment, including the 
definition of fully cooled, in the ongoing BVM energy conservation 
standard rulemaking instead of this test procedure final rule. (Docket 
No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022).
    The subsequent sections III.A.1 through III.A.11 of this final rule 
discuss the specific test procedure provisions that required 
clarification, any comments received on these topics in response to the 
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE's response to those comments, and any 
final amendments DOE is adopting in this final rule.
1. Updating the Referenced Test Method
    The current DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines 
incorporates by reference two industry test procedures, ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2004 and ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, which establish a test 
method for beverage vending machines and a method for determining 
refrigerated volume, respectively. Each of these industry test 
procedures has been updated since the publication of the DOE test 
procedure in 2006. The most current versions are ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2010 and AHAM HRF-1-2008.
    ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 was amended from the 2004 version to 
include new definitions and nomenclature established by DOE in the 2009 
BVM final rule. These changes include removing references to specific 
sealed-bottle package designs such as ``bottled'' or ``canned,'' 
revising the scope, and incorporating a new Appendix C, ``Measurement 
of Volume,'' which consists of certain portions of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004 
for measuring the refrigerated volume. Specifically, ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2004 incorporated the portions of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004 
currently referenced in the DOE test procedure, section 5.2 (excluding 
subsections 5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4), which describes the method for 
determining refrigerated volume for residential freezers, as well as 
section 5.1, which describes the purpose of the section. These new 
amendments make the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 test procedure 
identical to the DOE test procedure established in the 2006 BVM test 
procedure final rule. As the amendments to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 are primarily editorial, they do not affect the tested DEC. In the 
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to update the industry test 
method incorporated by reference to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 for 
the measurement of DEC and vendible capacity. 79 FR 46908, 46911-46912 
(Aug. 11, 2014).
    Since DOE published the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, AHAM 
has released a new version of the AHAM HRF-1 test method, which 
reorganizes and simplifies the test method as presented in ANSI/AHAM 
HRF-1-2004. The revised AHAM HRF-1 test method, ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2008, 
combines sections 4, 5, and 6, which relate to measuring the 
refrigerated volume of refrigerators and freezers, into one section 
describing methods for determining the refrigerated volume of 
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, wine chillers, and freezers. This 
unified and simplified method includes several changes regarding the 
inclusion or exclusion of certain special features from the 
determination of refrigerated volume, such that DOE believes AHAM HRF-
1-2008 has the potential to yield refrigerated volume values that 
differ slightly from those measured and calculated using the method in 
the current DOE test procedure. As such, in the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR, DOE proposed to adopt Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 as the volume measurement methodology in its amended BVM test 
procedure. In the NOPR, DOE stated that adopting Appendix C of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 would simplify testing for manufacturers 
because it would allow them to reference a single document containing 
all information needed to conduct the DOE test procedure. DOE also 
stated that it did not believe that the updated AHAM HRF-1-2008 test 
procedure has sufficient additional merit, compared to the volume 
calculation method included in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, to 
justify the additional burden on manufacturers. 79 FR at 46912. 
Commensurate with this proposal, DOE also proposed to remove ANSI/AHAM 
HRF-1-2004 from the documents incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 
431.293. Id.
    In response to these proposals, DOE received several comments from 
interested parties regarding which industry test methods DOE should 
incorporate by reference and the impacts of updating the industry test 
methods incorporated by reference in the DOE test procedure. Automated 
Merchandising Systems, Inc. (AMS), Sanden Vendo America Inc. (SVA), and 
Coca-Cola generally supported DOE's proposal to update its test 
procedure reference to ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 1; 
\4\ SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2). Coca-Cola and 
ASHRAE's Standard Project Committee (SPC) 32.1 recommended that DOE 
wait for ASHRAE 32.1 revisions before adopting a new version of 32.1. 
The California investor-owned utilities (CA IOUs), including Pacific 
Gas & Electric, Southern California Gas Company, Southern California 
Edison, and San Diego Gas and Electric, commented that DOE should align 
new test procedure development with ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 and track the 
efforts of the ASHRAE Standard Project Committee 32.1 (ASHRAE SPC 32.1) 
to incorporate changes into Appendix B before publication of the final 
rule (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 2; ASHRAE 
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1-2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A notation in this form provides a reference for information 
that is in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop test procedures 
for beverage vending machines (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0045, 
which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). This particular 
notation refers to a comment: (1) submitted by Automated 
Merchandising Systems, Inc. (AMS); (2) appearing in document number 
0007 of the docket; and (3) appearing on page 1 of that document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE appreciates comments from interested parties and agrees that 
alignment with the most recent version of the industry test method, 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, is advisable and will make testing beverage vending 
machines more consistent with the latest industry methods. DOE is aware 
that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 was convened in January 2014 and has been meeting 
monthly to discuss potential updates to the ASHRAE 32.1 standard.\5\ 
DOE has been participating in these meetings to stay abreast of the 
changes ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering. To the extent possible, DOE has 
sought to align this final rule with those discussions and proposed 
updates. However, DOE notes that the discussions of the committee are 
not final until such amendments are approved as a new version of the 
ASHRAE 32.1 standard. At this time, DOE is not aware of ASHRAE's 
specific timeline for making such an updated version available. DOE 
also notes that DOE must also consider its obligations under 42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(1)(A) to review test procedures every 7 years, as well as the 
relationship between the BVM test

[[Page 45763]]

procedure rulemaking and the ongoing BVM energy conservation standards 
rulemaking, when determining timelines. As such, DOE is compelled to 
move forward with finalizing the BVM test procedure amendments, as 
presented in this final rule, to satisfy its EPCA requirements and not 
adversely impact the BVM energy conservation standards rulemaking 
schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The meeting minutes for ASHRAE SPC 32.1 are available at: 
http://spc321.ashraepcs.org/. DOE notes that, as of April 10, 2015, 
the Web site was last updated June 10, 2014 and, as such, only 
meeting minutes through May 2014 were available, although the 
committee has continued to meet since that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding DOE's proposal to update the test method for determining 
refrigerated volume, Coca-Cola expressed support for the method 
described in HRF-1-2008 for determining refrigerated volume but 
emphasized that measurements resulting from these proposed 
clarifications would render different results than existing procedure, 
as opposed to DOE's proposed adoption of Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1-2010. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and AMS 
objected to DOE's proposal to update the referenced method of test for 
the measurement of refrigerated volume in its test procedure from 
section 5 of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004 to Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-
2010. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1-2; AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 1-2) 
In particular, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that they are considering 
updating Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 to reference section 4 of 
AHAM HRF-1-2008 to simplify the refrigerated volume measurement process 
that would result in minimal differences in the measurement of 
refrigerated volume. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1-2) AMS 
commented that the new calculations would affect the Maximum Daily 
Energy Consumption (MDEC) of their machines. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 1-2)
    In response to comments regarding the proposed test method for 
determining refrigerated volume, DOE analyzed ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, 
AHAM HRF-1-2008, and Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 and compared 
the relevant methods. DOE believes AHAM HRF-1-2008 has the potential to 
yield refrigerated volume values that differ slightly from those 
calculated using ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, which was the method 
incorporated by reference in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, as 
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 acknowledged during the NOPR public meeting. DOE does 
not believe that the updated method for computing refrigerated volume 
from section 4 of the AHAM HRF-1-2008 test method has sufficient 
additional merit when compared to the volume calculation method 
included in Appendix C of the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, which 
adopts section 5.2 (excluding subsections 5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4) of 
ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004. Therefore, DOE is adopting provisions to continue 
referencing ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, as incorporated into Appendix C of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010.
    In addition, adopting Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 
will allow manufacturers to reference a single industry standard 
containing all information needed to conduct the DOE test procedure for 
beverage vending machines and will also limit manufacturer testing 
burden since they will only have to purchase one industry standard to 
complete the DOE test procedure. For these reasons, DOE is updating the 
industry test method incorporated by reference to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2010 for the measurement of refrigerated volume and removing the 
incorporation by reference of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004 from the DOE test 
procedure. Accordingly, DOE is also amending the definition for 
refrigerated volume at Sec.  431.292 to reference the appropriate 
standard.
2. Other Minor Clarifications and Amendments to ASHRAE 32.1-2010
    In reviewing ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, and in light of the comments 
received from interested parties suggesting that DOE follow the work of 
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 to update the ASHRAE 32.1 test method, DOE is adopting 
several additional clarifications in this final rule. Specifically, DOE 
is clarifying: (1) The ambient temperature and relative humidity 
tolerances, (2) the voltage tolerances for equipment with dual 
nameplate voltages, (3) the requirements for sampling and recording of 
specific test data, and (4) how to calculate DEC based on tested values 
determined in the ASHRAE 32.1 test method.
    DOE is incorporating these amendments in response to comments that 
DOE should align updates to the DOE test procedure for beverage vending 
machines with the updates being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1. DOE has 
determined that these amendments will improve the clarity and 
repeatability of the DOE test procedure and is incorporating these 
amendments in Appendices A and B of the BVM test procedure.
a. Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Tolerance
    In written comments, AMS suggested that DOE clarify permissible 
temperature limits during testing (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3). DOE 
appreciates the comment, and wishes to clarify that ambient temperature 
and humidity shall be maintained within the ranges specified in Table 
1, ``Standard Test Conditions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 for each 
recorded measurement for the duration of the test, including 
stabilization. The ambient temperature and relative humidity 
requirements from Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 that are pertinent 
to the DOE test procedure are shown in Table III.2. To clarify that the 
tolerance on relative humidity is in fact in the units of ``percent 
relative humidity (percent RH)'' and not a percentage of the measured 
value, the acceptable range is also provided in Table III.2.

              Table III.2--Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Specified Value and Tolerance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Test and pretest condition                Value                  Tolerance             Acceptable range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambient Temperature..................  75 [deg]F..............  2 [deg]F...  73-77 [deg]F
Relative Humidity....................  45 percent RH..........  5 percent    40-50 percent RH
                                                                 RH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this final rule, DOE is adopting a similar table in section 2.1 
of Appendix A and B to clearly specify the appropriate test conditions 
and applicable tolerances for, among other things, the ambient 
temperature and relative humidity.
    DOE's amendments specifying the ambient temperature and relative 
humidity tolerances in Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 as an 
instantaneous tolerance to be applied to each measurement are 
consistent with the updates ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering in their 
revisions of the ASHRAE 32.1 standard. In addition, such treatment is 
consistent with the specification of ambient conditions in the DOE test 
procedure for similar equipment, including commercial refrigeration 
equipment (10 CFR 431.64) and automatic commercial ice makers (10 CFR 
431.134). DOE also notes,

[[Page 45764]]

however, that such treatment is different than the tolerance applied to 
the integrated average temperature (as described in section III.A.7 of 
this final rule), which is a single tolerance applied to that one 
average value and is not applicable to each temperature measurement in 
that case.
    In addition, when reviewing the ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 test method 
in conjunction with ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE determined that the accuracy 
requirements for the equipment used to measure relative humidity are 
not clearly specified. As the relative humidity is required to be 
maintained within 5 percent RH of the specified value, the 
precision of the measurement equipment must be of higher resolution 
than the allowed tolerance in order to ensure that the relative 
humidity is in fact maintained within such a range. As such, and in 
accordance with the changes being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE is 
adopting provisions in section 1.1 of Appendices A and B that relative 
humidity shall be measured with a calibrated instrument accurate to 
2 percent RH at the ambient conditions specified in Table 1 
of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010. That is, the instrument must have a measured 
accuracy of 2 percent RH at 45 percent RH, or 4.4 percent 
of the measured value.
b. Voltage and Frequency Tolerances
    Following publication of the NOPR, DOE learned that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 
was considering changes to ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 concerning BVM 
nameplate voltages. Specifically, DOE became aware that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 
was considering a change such that the same tolerances on nameplate 
voltage and frequency that apply to equipment with single nameplate 
voltages, namely 2 percent and 1 percent, 
respectively, should also apply to the tested voltage for equipment 
with dual nameplate voltages. Consistent with the changes being 
considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE determined that the tolerances on 
voltage and frequency listed in paragraph (a) of section 6.2, ``Voltage 
and Frequency,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 (which addresses beverage 
vending machines with single nameplate voltages) are not equivalently 
applied to equipment with dual nameplate voltages in paragraph (b) of 
section 6.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010. As such, DOE is adopting, in this 
final rule, provisions in section 2.1 of Appendices A and B that 
beverage vending machines with dual nameplate voltages must be 
conducted at the lower of the two voltages 2 percent and at 
the rated frequency 1 percent.
c. Data Collection
    In section 7.2.2.3, ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 currently specifies that 
the following data shall be recorded for 24 consecutive hours after 
stabilization has been achieved: Ambient temperature, relative 
humidity, average beverage temperature, energy consumption, input 
voltage, and time. However, ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 does not provide 
specific requirements regarding how frequently such data should be 
sampled.
    In response to the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, AMS recommended 
that DOE clearly state at what interval each reading is taken, and 
suggested that readings should be recorded at a minimum frequency of 
once per minute. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3)
    DOE agrees with AMS that the sampling interval for data collection 
should be clearly specified, as collecting data at different sampling 
intervals can affect the energy consumption results. As such, DOE is 
clarifying in section 2.2.4 of Appendix A and 2.2.6 of Appendix B that 
the sampling interval must be at least 1 minute; that is, each measured 
data variable should be recorded at least every 1 minute. DOE notes 
that this requirement is also consistent with the changes being 
considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1 for future revisions of the ASHRAE 32.1 
standard.
    In addition, DOE notes that, as part of this final rule, DOE is 
also adopting amendments to the BVM test procedure that change the 
terms that are used to refer to the ``average beverage temperature,'' 
as described more fully in section III.A.7 and III.B.3 of this final 
rule. Specifically, instead of the ``average beverage temperature,'' as 
referenced in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, DOE's test procedure for beverage 
vending machines as adopted in this final rule refers to the 
``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature'' and the 
``integrated average temperature.'' As such, DOE is clarifying in 
section 2.2.4 of Appendix A and 2.2.6 of Appendix B that, in section 
7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, the ``average beverage temperature'' 
refers to the ``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage 
temperature.''
d. Calculation of Daily Energy Consumption.
    Section 7.2.3, ``Energy Consumption Calculations,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1-2010 specifies that the daily rated energy consumption of each 
basic model of a vending machine shall be determined as:

ED = (ET/tT) x 24

Where:

ED = primary rated energy consumption per day, kWh,
ET = energy consumed during the test, kWh,
tT = duration of the test, h, and
24 = the number of hours per day.

    In reviewing ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, DOE realized that there may be 
confusion regarding the terminology used in this section and how these 
values are to be used when determining the DEC result for a given 
tested unit for the purposes of rating equipment in accordance with the 
DOE test procedure. Specifically, the variable ED is 
referred to as both the ``daily rated energy consumption'' in the 
introductory paragraph and the ``primary rated energy consumption per 
day'' in the variable definitions below the stated equation In section 
2.3 of Appendices A and B, DOE is referring to the variable 
ED using only the term ``primary rated energy consumption 
per day'' to describe how to use this value when determining the DEC of 
each tested beverage vending machine.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ DOE notes that additional calculations may be required to 
determine the ``daily energy consumption'' in accordance with the 
DOE BVM test procedure adopted in this final rule to address payment 
mechanisms, depending on the configuration in which the beverage 
vending machine is tested. See section III.A.11.a for more 
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also notes that ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 currently does not 
specify how to treat measured values when calculating the DEC values in 
accordance with section 7.2.3, ``Energy Consumption Calculations,'' of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010. In this final rule, DOE is also adopting 
specifications in section 2.3.1 of Appendix A and 2.3.3 of Appendix B 
that the primary rated energy consumption per day (ED) must 
be calculated with raw measured values and rounded to units of 0.01 
kWh/day.
3. Eliminating Testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F Ambient Test Condition
    Both ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the test method incorporated 
by reference in the DOE test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test 
procedure final rule, and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, the test 
method DOE is incorporating by reference in the amended test procedure 
as discussed in section III.A.1 of this final rule, specify two tests: 
One at an ambient condition of 75[emsp14][deg]F  
2[emsp14][deg]F and 45 percent  5 percent relative humidity 
(``the 75[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition'') and the other at an 
ambient condition of 90[emsp14][deg]F  2[emsp14][deg]F and 
65 percent  5 percent relative humidity (``the 
90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition''). By incorporating by 
reference ANSI/ASHRAE Standard

[[Page 45765]]

32.1-2004, DOE's current test procedure for beverage vending machines 
requires testing at both the 75[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition 
and 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition. In the energy conservation 
standards rulemaking that culminated in the 2009 BVM final rule, 
however, DOE decided that only the measured DEC determined at the 
75[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition would be used for the purposes 
of demonstrating compliance with applicable energy conservation 
standards. The data taken at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test 
condition were not used by DOE in setting the standards established in 
the 2009 BVM final rule and are not used to demonstrate compliance with 
those standards. 74 FR 44914, 44920 (Aug. 31, 2009) and 10 CFR 429.52. 
However, the 2009 BVM final rule did not similarly amend the DOE test 
procedure to remove the requirement to test at the 90[emsp14][deg]F 
ambient test condition and, as such, the requirement to test covered 
BVM models at both the 75[emsp14][deg]F and 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient 
test conditions established in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule 
remained in place until being reevaluated in this test procedure 
rulemaking.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to amend its test 
procedure to eliminate the requirement to perform a test at the 
90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition as described in ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2004 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010. 79 FR 46908, 
46912-46913 (Aug. 11, 2014). DOE understands that the 90[emsp14][deg]F 
test is used primarily to represent and evaluate the performance of 
some units that may be installed outdoors, especially in hot-humid 
locations; however, as mentioned above, the performance of a beverage 
vending machine at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition is not 
currently used for DOE regulatory purposes. Therefore, DOE does not see 
a need to maintain the 90[emsp14][deg]F test condition as part of the 
DOE test procedure.
    DOE believes that removing the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test 
condition test requirement will also reduce manufacturer burden 
associated with its test procedure by eliminating testing that does not 
significantly increase the accuracy or representativeness of the DOE 
test procedure and is unnecessary for demonstrating compliance with 
DOE's energy conservation standards.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comment on its 
proposal to eliminate the requirement to conduct testing at the 90 
[deg]F ambient test condition. 79 FR at 46913. AMS, SVA, and ASHRAE SPC 
32.1 supported the elimination of testing at the 90 [deg]F test 
condition. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 2; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; ASHRAE SPC 
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2) Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) asked why DOE 
would not test their machines according to worst case conditions. 
(NRCan, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 25) Coca-Cola also 
agreed with DOE that there should be a single set of conditions for 
testing and rating purposes. Coca-Cola, however, stated that some 
machines are designed for higher ambient temperatures, and asked DOE to 
factor this into the application of test results, even if the machine 
is not tested at 90 [deg]F. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2)
    DOE appreciates the comments from AMS, SVA, and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 
supporting the elimination of the 90 [deg]F ambient test condition and 
Coca-Cola's comment to have a single set of conditions for testing and 
rating purposes. In response to the comment from NRCan, DOE notes that 
it is required to create test procedures that are representative of the 
performance of the equipment under an average cycle of use. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(3)) DOE believes that the test conditions required by the test 
procedure, namely 75 [deg]F and 45 percent relative humidity, are 
reasonably representative of the average operating conditions of most 
beverage vending machines. In particular, DOE notes that the majority 
of beverage vending machines are installed indoors (see chapter 7 of 
the BVM energy conservation standard preliminary analysis technical 
support document; Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022) and that such 
indoor environments are normally kept close to the average temperature 
used for the DOE test. As such, DOE believes that the DEC values 
measured at the current test conditions are an accurate reflection of 
field energy use and does not believe a test condition of 90 [deg]F 
would be representative of field energy use for the majority of 
equipment. In response to Coca-Cola's comment regarding the application 
of test results on machines designed for higher ambient temperatures, 
DOE understands that some beverage vending machines are placed in 
locations that experience ambient temperature and relative humidity 
conditions that differ from those required in the test procedure, 
including environments that are often warmer and have higher relative 
humidity than specified by ASHRAE 32.1-2010. However, it is not 
feasible or realistic to test BVM models at all the different ambient 
temperature conditions they may experience in the field. First, doing 
so would be extremely burdensome. Second, it is difficult to determine 
which BVM models will be placed in different ambient conditions (e.g., 
tropical conditions), as often the same BVM model may be placed indoors 
or outdoors. In the BVM energy conservation standards preliminary 
analysis, DOE estimated that 18 percent of Class B and Combination B 
\7\ beverage vending machines were located outdoors, and all Class A 
and Combination A \7\ equipment is located indoors (see chapter 7 of 
the BVM energy conservation standard preliminary analysis technical 
support document (TSD)). DOE believes that the required test condition 
of 75 [deg]F is representative of the indoor environments in which the 
majority of BVM units are placed. Therefore, DOE believes the 75 [deg]F 
ambient test condition provides a reasonable and comparable 
representation of energy performance for all BVM models and testing at 
alternative test conditions is not necessary. DOE is accounting for the 
variable energy performance of beverage vending machines that are 
placed outdoors as part of the energy use analysis associated with the 
BVM energy conservation standard rulemaking. However, DOE is not 
considering different or alternative energy conservation standards for 
such equipment based on the fact that most BVM models can be placed 
indoors or outdoors and that, as a result, a standard based on analysis 
at the 75 [deg]F test procedure ambient condition would be applicable. 
(See Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022 for more information.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In the DOE energy conservation standard preliminary 
analysis, DOE discussed dividing the ``combination vending machine'' 
equipment class into ``Combination A'' equipment that was fully 
cooled and ``Combination B'' equipment that was not fully cooled, 
similar to the Class A and Class B distinction. See chapter 2 of the 
BVM energy conservation standard preliminary analysis TSD. 
Additionally, DOE is proposing language to address equipment class 
distinctions as part of the energy conservation standards 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, in this final rule, DOE is removing the requirement to 
conduct testing at the 90 [deg]F ambient test condition as part of the 
DOE test procedure. DOE is clarifying the ambient test conditions 
necessary for testing in accordance with the DOE test procedure in a 
new Table A.1 in Appendix A and Table B.1 in Appendix B in section 2.1 
of both Appendices A and B. DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is also 
currently considering updating ASHRAE 32.1 to remove the 90 [deg]F 
ambient test condition.
4. Test Procedure for Combination Vending Machines
    ``Combination vending machine'' is currently defined as a 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that also has 
non-refrigerated

[[Page 45766]]

volumes for the purpose of vending other, non-``sealed beverage'' 
merchandise. 10 CFR 431.292. Based on this definition, any machine (a) 
that upon payment dispenses beverages in sealed containers and (b) in 
which the entire internal storage volume is refrigerated is not a 
combination vending machine.
    In the 2009 BVM final rule, DOE elected to define ``combination 
vending machine,'' but refrained from setting standards for combination 
vending machines due to a lack of data regarding their energy 
performance. Id. However, DOE is currently considering standards for 
combination vending machines in a parallel energy conservation 
standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022)
    While combination vending machines are not currently required to 
comply with energy conservation standards, any representations with 
regard to the DEC of such equipment must still be made in accordance 
with the DOE BVM test procedure. DOE's current test procedure is 
appropriate for the evaluation of the refrigerated volume, vendible 
capacity, and energy use of combination vending machines. DOE notes, 
however, that the application of the BVM test procedure may require 
clarification as to how it is applied to combination vending machines. 
Accordingly, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to 
clarify the test procedure for combination vending machines. 79 FR 
46908, 46913-46914 (Aug. 11, 2014). In the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR, DOE proposed that only the refrigerated compartment would be 
considered in the refrigerated volume calculation, while both 
refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments would be considered in 
the vendible capacity calculation. Similarly, DOE proposed that 
standard test packages be placed in the next-to-vend product location 
only in the refrigerated portion of the refrigerated beverage vending 
machine, and only the refrigerated portion of the combination vending 
machine be required to be fully loaded to capacity. 79 FR at 46914.
    With regard to the measurement of DEC for combination vending 
machines, DOE also proposed that any lighting or other energy-consuming 
features in the non-refrigerated compartment be fully energized during 
the test procedure and operated in the same manner as any lighting or 
features in the refrigerated compartment. DOE also proposed that the 
total energy use of the machine measured during the 24-hour test would 
comprise the DEC, as measured in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2010. Id.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed the addition of 
these clarifications to the DOE test procedure at 10 CFR 431.294 for 
combination vending machines and requested comment on the applicability 
of the existing test procedure, as clarified, to combination vending 
machines. In response, SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 commented that they 
believe the test procedure is applicable to combination vending 
machines. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2) 
Coca-Cola commented that the test was applicable to combination vending 
machines that have more than half of the machine capacity refrigerated. 
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3) AMS noted that the test procedure does 
not specify how or what products would be required to be loaded in the 
non-refrigerated product compartment during the test, and stated this 
could affect the energy consumption of combination vending machines 
that do not provide 100 percent thermal isolation between zones. (AMS, 
No. 0007 at p. 2) AMS commented that the insulation between 
refrigerated and non-refrigerated zones does not completely separate 
the two zones and hence should not be excluded from the MDEC 
calculation. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 4)
    DOE appreciates the comments from SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 
confirming DOE's position that the DOE test procedure is applicable to 
combination vending machines. However, DOE disagrees with Coca-Cola's 
comment that they believe the test is only applicable to combination 
vending machines that have more than half of the machine capacity 
refrigerated. The DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines is 
applicable to all equipment that meets the definition of a 
``refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine,'' as defined 
at 10 CFR 431.292, including Class A, Class B, and combination vending 
machines. As noted above, DOE currently defines ``combination vending 
machine'' as a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine 
that also has non-refrigerated volumes for the purpose of vending 
other, non-``sealed beverage'' merchandise. 10 CFR 431.292. DOE notes 
that its regulations do not restrict the applicability of the 
definition based on the relative volumes of the refrigerated and non-
refrigerated volumes. As stated previously, any equipment that is 
capable of vending bottled or canned beverages upon payment from a 
refrigerated compartment contained within the unit, and also has non-
refrigerated compartments for the purpose of vending other, non-
``sealed beverage'' merchandise, meets the definition of a combination 
vending machine regardless of the relative volume of the refrigerated 
and non-refrigerated compartments.
    In considering the applicability of the combination vending machine 
definition, DOE wishes to clarify that combination vending machines 
must include compartments that are physically separated. However, DOE 
acknowledges that some combination equipment designs employ a common 
product delivery chute between the refrigerated and non-refrigerated 
compartments. As such, DOE also wishes to clarify that such physically 
separate compartments in a combination vending machine may or may not 
share a common product delivery chute for the purposes of delivering 
vendible merchandise to the customer. To permit additional 
consideration of these issues and to provide more opportunity for 
comment, DOE will further address the definition of combination vending 
machine in the standards rulemaking (Docket EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022). DOE 
notes that any changes to the definition adopted in the standards 
rulemaking would be to provide more clarity of the distinctions between 
the various product classes and would not change the appropriate 
classifications.
    With regard to the determination of refrigerated volume and 
vendible capacity for combination vending machines, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is 
also considering specifying that both the refrigerated volume and 
vendible capacity measurements refer only to the deliberately 
refrigerated compartment(s). In consideration of these changes 
suggested by ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE is also adopting wording changes in 
Appendices A and B to help clarify testing of refrigerated and non-
refrigerated compartments. Section 3.2 of each appendix specifies that 
the vendible capacity to be measured includes only the capacity of the 
refrigerated compartment; this is a change from DOE's proposed approach 
in the BVM test procedure NOPR, where DOE had proposed to include the 
entire volume from which the product may be vended, whether or not that 
volume is refrigerated. In this final rule, DOE is also clarifying in 
section 3.1 of each appendix that the refrigerated volume measurement 
only includes the refrigerated compartment, and, in section 2.2.1.3 of 
each appendix, that only this compartment shall be fully loaded to 
capacity with standard product and test packages. These clarifications 
are consistent with the

[[Page 45767]]

changes being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1 to the ASHRAE 32.1 
standard. DOE will continue to consider how to delineate more clearly 
the distinction between refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments 
as it addresses the definition of combination vending machine in the 
standards rulemaking (Docket EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022). Because the goal 
is to ensure the regulatory text is clear and consistent between the 
test procedure, the definitions and the standards, DOE may make, as 
part of the standards rulemaking, conforming changes to these sections 
to reflect any final changes to the definition of combination vending 
machine.
    DOE agrees with AMS that the loading of non-refrigerated 
compartments for the purposes of testing combination vending machines 
requires clarification. The thermal mass of any items loaded into the 
volumes that are not refrigerated may affect the measured DEC of 
equipment and, as such, it is important that the loading of these 
compartments be done consistently to ensure repeatable and comparable 
results. DOE also notes that there is significant variability in the 
thermal mass of the different ``non-sealed beverage merchandise'' that 
might be loaded into the volumes that are not refrigerated. As such, as 
mentioned previously, in this final rule, DOE is clarifying in section 
2.2.1.3 of Appendices A and B to Subpart Q of Part 431 that, during 
conduct of the test procedure, the non-refrigerated compartments of 
combination vending machines must not be loaded with any standard 
products or other vendible merchandise. In response to AMS's comment 
suggesting that the refrigerated and non-refrigerated zones may not be 
completely separated and, thus, should be considered in the calculation 
of the standard level for combination equipment, DOE agrees with AMS 
that some combination vending machines may be designed such that the 
refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments are not completely 
thermally isolated, such as from air leakage through a shared product 
delivery chute. However, DOE notes that a refrigerated compartment that 
has a thermal gradient is considered to be zone-cooled. As noted above, 
DOE is continuing to consider how best to clarify the distinction 
between refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments in a combination 
vending machine as part of the standards rulemaking. Regarding the 
standard level for such combination equipment, DOE notes that 
combination vending machines are not currently subject to standards but 
that DOE is considering new standards for such equipment in the ongoing 
BVM energy conservation standard rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-
STD-0022) DOE acknowledges that the fact that there may be some heat 
transfer between the non-refrigerated and refrigerated volumes may 
affect the appropriate energy conservation standard level, and DOE will 
consider such in the setting of an appropriate standard level for this 
equipment.
5. Loading of BVM Models When Conducting the DOE Test Procedure
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to add language 
to the BVM test procedure to clarify the loading requirements for 
beverage vending machines that are offered in a variety of 
configurations and may be capable of vending other refrigerated 
merchandise from their refrigerated volumes. 79 FR 46908, 46914 (Aug. 
11, 2014). Specifically, DOE proposed to amend the regulatory text to 
clarify that, for beverage vending machines that are available with a 
variety of product storage configurations, the refrigerated 
compartment(s) should be configured, for purposes of testing, to hold 
the maximum number of sealed beverages that it is capable of 
accommodating per manufacturer specifications. Id. For example, if some 
areas of the refrigerated volume can be configured either to vend 
sealed beverages or to vend other refrigerated merchandise, the 
equipment should be configured and loaded with the maximum number of 
sealed beverages in the refrigerated compartment(s) for testing.
    DOE understands that tests conducted with other configurations may 
produce different results because of the decrease in thermal mass in 
the refrigerated space. Various configurations that differ in placement 
and type of shelving only may be placed in the same basic model with 
the performance at the maximum beverage configuration used to represent 
the performance of all of the configurations in the basic model. 
Alternatively, if a manufacturer wishes to make different 
representations regarding the energy consumption of a beverage vending 
machine in various shelving configurations, the manufacturer may elect 
to test and certify each unique shelving configuration as a separate 
basic model.\8\ In that case, the unique shelving configuration for 
that BVM model would comprise the ``maximum beverage configuration'' 
for that model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For purposes of beverage vending machines, basic model means 
all units of a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine (or class thereof) manufactured by one manufacturer, having 
the same primary energy source, and which have essentially identical 
electrical, physical, and functional characteristics that affect 
energy consumption or energy efficiency. See 10 CFR 431.292. If 
differing shelving configurations affect the energy consumption, 
these differing configurations should be considered different basic 
models, unless manufacturers elect to group BVM units that vary in 
shelving configuration only into the same BVM basic model and rate 
such model based on the performance of the shelving configuration 
that holds the maximum number of sealed beverages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to DOE's proposed language regarding the loading 
requirements for BVM models subject to the DOE test procedure, ASHRAE 
SPC 32.1 expressed support for DOE's proposal to add language to the 
DOE test procedure in Appendices A and B to clarify the loading 
requirements for covered BVM models. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 
2) DOE did not receive any negative comments on this proposal. As such, 
in this final rule, DOE has added language to the DOE test procedure in 
section 2.2.1 of Appendices A and B to clarify the loading requirements 
for the refrigerated compartment(s) of BVM models. As noted in section 
III.A.4 of this final rule, DOE is also clarifying that non-
refrigerated compartments should be left empty and not loaded with any 
vendible products or merchandise.
6. Specifying the Characteristics of the Standard Product
    When testing a BVM model in accordance with the DOE test procedure 
established in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, the equipment is 
to be loaded with the maximum quantity of standard products and with 
standard test packages in each next-to-be-vended position for each 
selection, as required by section 7.2.2.1 and 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2004. Section 5 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 further 
requires that the standard product shall be 12-ounce cans for machines 
that are capable of dispensing 12-ounce cans. For all other machines, 
the standard product shall be the product specified by the manufacturer 
as the standard product.
    The DOE test procedure established in the 2006 BVM test procedure 
final rule does not provide any further specificity regarding the 
characteristics of the standard product when conducting the DOE test 
procedure or the manufacture of standard test packages. DOE understands 
that there may be variability among manufacturers and testing 
laboratories with regard to the characteristics of standard products 
and

[[Page 45768]]

standard test packages. DOE believes that such variability may result 
in minor inconsistencies in test results. As such, in the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify the characteristics of the 
standard product and standard test package to ensure test results are 
as consistent and repeatable as possible. 79 FR 46908, 46914-46915 
(Aug. 11, 2014). Specifically, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE 
proposed to add text to the BVM test procedure in Appendices A and B, 
specifying that the standard product shall be:
     Standard 12-ounce aluminum beverage cans filled with a 
liquid with a density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/mL)  
0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F for beverage vending machines that are capable of 
vending cans,
     20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a liquid with a 
density of 1.0 g/mL  0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F for beverage 
vending machines that are not capable of vending 12-ounce cans, but are 
capable of vending 20-ounce bottles, and
     the product specified by the manufacturer as the standard 
product for beverage vending machines that are not capable of vending 
12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles.
    Id.
    DOE selected a density range of 1.0 g/mL  0.1 g/mL, as 
it is inclusive of most test fluids used today. For example, this 
density range includes water, diet and regular soda, fruit juices, and 
propylene glycol/water mixtures up to 50/50 percent by volume. In 
addition, Fischer-Nickel conducted research in 2004 that compared the 
temperature measurements of standard test packages constructed in the 
manner specified by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1 to the test packages 
described in ASHRAE Standard 117-2002, ``Method of Testing Closed 
Refrigerators and Freezers,'' which are 1-pint plastic test packages 
filled with a 50/50 mixture of water and propylene glycol; little 
variation was found in measured temperatures when comparing different 
test package materials and fluids.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Cowen, D. and Zabrowski, D. 2004. ``Application and 
Evaluation of ASHRAE 117-2002 and ASHRAE 32.1-1997.'' FSTC Report # 
5011.04.01. Fischer-Nickel, Inc. Available at: http://www.fishnick.com/publications/appliancereports/refrigeration/Application_of_ASHRAE_117_and_32.1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 3 of ASHRAE 32.1-2004 and 2010 defines the standard test 
package as a beverage container of the size and shape for which the 
vending machine is designed, altered to include a temperature-measuring 
instrument at its center of mass. DOE finds the requirements in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 and 2010 to be fairly clear and concise when 
paired with the clarification above regarding the standard product. 
Therefore, DOE did not propose additional clarifications regarding the 
construction of standard test packages beyond the proposed 
clarification that the standard product shall be 12-ounce cans or 20-
ounce bottles for BVM models that are capable of vending cans or 
bottles, respectively, filled with a liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL 
 0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F. Id.
    In response to DOE's proposals in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, 
DOE received several comments from interested parties supporting DOE's 
proposed clarifications. AMS expressed their approval of DOE's proposed 
definition of a standard test package. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3) 
Specifically, Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 agreed with DOE's assertion 
that the most common standard products were 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce 
bottles. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 
2)
    DOE also received several comments suggesting improvements or 
requesting further clarification to the proposed standard product 
specifications. Coca-Cola noted that beverage vending machines that 
dispense 330 mL ``slimline'' cans (which have a higher ratio of height 
to diameter than standard 12-ounce cans) also exist. (Coca-Cola, No. 
0010 at p. 3) AMS requested DOE clarify the standard products for helix 
driven machines, noting that they typically do not dispense 12-ounce 
cans. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 2-3) SVA supported clarity in what a 
standard product was, and noted that flexibility was required for 
machines designed to vend milk cartons, aseptic packs, pouches, and 
energy drinks. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1)
    DOE appreciates the comment from AMS in support of the definition 
of a standard test package. DOE also appreciates the comments from 
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and Coca-Cola acknowledging that 12-ounce cans or 20-
ounce bottles are the most common standard products and supporting 
DOE's clarification of the standard product definition. In response to 
the comments from Coca-Cola, SVA, and AMS regarding equipment that is 
designed to vend non-standard products, such as ``slimline'' cans, milk 
cartons, aseptic packs, pouches, and energy drinks, DOE agrees with 
commenters that flexibility in the specification of the standard 
product is required for beverage vending machines that are not capable 
of vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles. DOE appreciates the 
specific examples of such products provided by commenters where such 
provision would be required. For such beverage vending machines, the 
product specified by the manufacturer as the standard product shall 
continue to be used in testing. DOE will determine the appropriate 
standard product for use in testing by consulting manufacturer product 
literature. DOE notes, however, that manufacturers may only test 
equipment with products other than 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles if 
the machine is not capable of vending either of these product types.
    In light of these comments, DOE is not altering the clarification 
regarding the standard product proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adding a clarification in 
section 2.2.1.4 of Appendices A and B that the standard product shall 
be 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles for BVM models that are capable of 
vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles, respectively, filled with a 
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL  0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F, 
or the product specified by the manufacturer as the standard product 
for beverage vending machines that are not capable of vending 12-ounce 
cans or 20-ounce bottles.
7. Clarifying the Next-To-Vend Beverage Temperature Test Condition
    ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the test method incorporated by 
reference in the DOE test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test 
procedure final rule, states, ``the beverage temperature shall be 
measured in standard test packages in each next-to-be-vended position 
for each selection.'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 specifies an 
average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F 
``throughout test.'' The beverage temperature requirements of the ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 test method, which DOE proposed to 
incorporate by reference in the DOE BVM test procedure as part of the 
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR (79 FR 46908, 46911-46912 (Aug. 11, 
2014)), are identical to those of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004. 
However, DOE became aware of a need to clarify whether the next-to-vend 
temperature specification of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F 
``throughout test'' refers to a condition in which the average next-to-
vend temperature is maintained at 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F 
constantly for the duration of the test, or one in which the 
temperature of next-to-vend beverages is averaged across all selections 
and over the entire length of the test, resulting in a single value of 
36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify its 
test

[[Page 45769]]

procedure by explicitly stating that the temperature of next-to-vend 
beverages shall be averaged across all next-to-vend beverages and over 
the entire time of the test, resulting in a single value of 36 [deg]F 
 1 [deg]F. Specifically, to clarify this requirement, DOE 
proposed to incorporate a definition of integrated average temperature 
and define this term as the average of all standard test package 
measurements in the next-to-vend beverage positions taken during the 
test, expressed in degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F). 79 FR at 46915. That 
is, the integrated average temperature is calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.020

Where:

TIAT = integrated average temperature, [deg]F ([deg]C),
Txi = measured beverage temperature for next-to vend test package x 
at interval i,
d = total number of recorded intervals, and
n = total number of next-to-vend test packages.

    In response to DOE's proposed definition of integrated average 
temperature, SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 commented that they support DOE's 
definition of integrated average temperature. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; 
ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3) ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Southern California 
Edison (SCE), and AMS added that maintaining each individual 
thermocouple within 1 [deg]F of 36 [deg]F was unnecessarily rigorous 
and not possible in many machine designs. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at 
pp. 2-3; SCE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 43; AMS, No. 
0007 at p. 3) Coca-Cola also stated their understanding that 36 [deg]F 
 1 [deg]F should be applied over the entire testing period 
and cannot be maintained for every individual data measurement because 
of programmed defrost cycles. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3-4)
    DOE appreciates the comments from SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 
supporting DOE's definition of integrated average temperature. In 
response to comments from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, SCE, and AMS, DOE recognizes 
that it is not possible to maintain individual standard test packages 
in the next-to-vend beverage positions within 36 [deg]F  1 
[deg]F for some equipment designs due to spatial variability within the 
unit. In addition, DOE agrees with Coca-Cola's remarks that even an 
instantaneous spatial average of all standard test packages in the 
next-to-vend beverage locations may not be feasible to maintain 
throughout the entire test period due to temporal temperature 
variability resulting from defrost cycles or other compressor cycling 
behavior. DOE notes that these comments are consistent with DOE's 
proposed treatment of the ``average beverage temperature'' condition 
and the definition of integrated average temperature proposed in the 
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
    Therefore, in section 1.2 of Appendices A and B, DOE is adopting 
the definition of integrated average temperature proposed in the 2014 
BVM test procedure NOPR. DOE is also specifying, in section 2.1.1 of 
Appendices A and B, that the integrated average temperature must be 36 
[deg]F  1 [deg]F, or the lowest application product 
temperature as discussed in section III.A.10 of this final rule, for 
the purposes of testing equipment in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure. 79 FR at 49615.
    DOE notes that, while the integrated average temperature is the 
measurement that must be used to comply with DOE's requirements 
regarding the average beverage temperature of beverage vending machines 
during the test period (excluding the stabilization period), the 
instantaneous spatial average temperature of all standard test packages 
in the next-to-vend beverage positions is still a relevant measurement 
for the purposes of determining the presence of a refrigeration low 
power mode (see section III.B.3 of this final rule) and for determining 
temperature stabilization prior to initiating the test period. 
Specifically, section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 specifies that 
temperature stabilization is considered to be achieved 24 hours after 
the ``average beverage temperature'' reaches 36 [deg]F 1 
[deg]F (and measured energy consumption is within 2 percent for two 
successive 6-hr periods). In this case, the ``average beverage 
temperature'' specified in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 refers to the 
``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature'' and not a 
temporal average (i.e., the integrated average temperature). Therefore, 
in this final rule, DOE is also adopting in section 1.2 of Appendices A 
and B a new definition of instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage 
temperature, which means the spatial average temperature of all 
standard test packages in the next-to-vend beverage positions at a 
given time. To clarify, using the previously discussed nomenclature, 
the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature is 
calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.021

Where:

Ti = average beverage temperature at interval i, [deg]F ([deg]C),
Txi = measured beverage temperature for next-to-vend test package x 
at interval i, and
n = total number of next-to-vend test packages.

    To clarify the applicability of the instantaneous average next-to-
vend beverage temperature to the temperature stabilization requirements 
in the test procedure, DOE is also clarifying in section 2.1.1.1, that 
temperature stabilization is considered to be achieved 24 hours after 
the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature reaches 36 
[deg]F 1 [deg]F.
    Regarding the measurement of the integrated average temperature, 
AMS and SVA requested that some means be provided by which the number 
of thermocouples could be reduced. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3; SVA, No. 
0008 at p. 1) AMS further suggested that, as there are many different 
BVM geometries and configurations, manufacturers be allowed some 
flexibility in how this was accomplished, provided it could be 
demonstrated that the method used would generate equivalent DEC results 
to testing with a thermocouple in each next-to-vend beverage location. 
(AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3) Coca-Cola agreed with AMS and SVA and stated 
that added temperatures sensors introduce additional points of air 
infiltration into the machine and thus may upset the integrity of the 
test. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 4).
    In response to the comments from AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola regarding 
reduction in the number of standard test packages required for testing 
beverage vending machines, DOE agrees with commenters that there is 
potential to reduce burden associated with testing beverage vending 
machines with horizontal product configurations, which may have a large 
number of next-to-vend beverage locations, by reducing the number of 
standard test packages that are required to be loaded in the next-to-
vend beverage positions. Furthermore, DOE believes that provided the 
standard test packages are spatially distributed across the face of the 
beverage vending machine, the measured integrated average temperature 
should not be significantly different than that determined with a 
standard test package in each next-to-vend location. This is 
particularly true for fully-cooled, Class A beverage vending machines 
(which are the category of beverage vending machine that most commonly 
has a horizontal product arrangement), since the temperature 
distribution across the

[[Page 45770]]

standard test packages should be reasonably consistent. DOE also notes 
that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is, similarly, considering changing the 
requirements for loading standard test packages in equipment with 
horizontal product arrangement to reduce the required number of 
standard test packages.
    Therefore, consistent with the submitted comments from interested 
parties and the potential changes ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering, DOE 
is amending the requirements for placement of standard test packages 
for beverage vending machines with products arranged horizontally in 
this final rule. In particular, DOE is specifying in section 2.2.1 of 
Appendices A and B that, for refrigerated bottled or canned beverage 
vending machines with products arranged horizontally (e.g., on shelves 
or in product spirals), standard test packages must be placed in the 
refrigerated compartment(s) in the following locations, as shown in 
Figure III.1:
    1) For odd-number shelves, when counting starting from the bottom 
shelf, standard test packages shall be placed at:
    a) the left-most next-to-vend product location,
    b) the right-most next-to-vend product location, and
    c) for equipment with greater than or equal to five product 
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product location in the 
center of the shelf (i.e., equidistant from the left-most and right-
most next-to-vend product locations) if there are an odd number of 
next-to-vend products on the shelf or the next-to-vend product location 
immediately to the right and to the left of the center position if 
there are an even number of next-to-vend products on the shelf.
    2) For even-numbered shelves, when counting from the bottom shelf, 
standard test packages shall be placed at either:
    a) for equipment with less than or equal to six next-to-vend 
product locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product location(s) 
\10\ (1) one location towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location and (2) one location towards the center from the 
right-most next-to-vend product location, or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For equipment with three next-to-vend product locations on 
each shelf, the next-to-vend product location one location towards 
the center from the left-most next-to-vend product location is the 
same position as the next-to-vend product location one location 
towards the center from the right-most next-to-vend product 
location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b) for equipment with greater than six next-to-vend product 
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product locations (1) two 
locations towards the center from the left-most next-to-vend product 
location and (2) two locations toward the center from the right-most 
next-to-vend product location.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.022

    As beverage vending machines with products arranged vertically, in 
stacks, typically have far fewer next-to-vend beverage locations, DOE 
has determined that such a sampling procedure is not necessary for this 
equipment.
8. Defining ``Fully Cooled''
    The 2009 BVM final rule established DOE energy conservation 
standards for beverage vending machines in two

[[Page 45771]]

equipment classes: Class A and Class B refrigerated beverage vending 
machines. 74 FR 44914, 44968 (Aug. 31, 2009). The distinguishing 
criterion between these two equipment classes is whether the equipment 
is fully cooled. 10 CFR 431.292.
    DOE regulations, however, have never defined the term ``fully 
cooled.'' In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to define 
``fully cooled'' as a condition in which the refrigeration system of a 
beverage vending machine cools products throughout the entire 
refrigerated volume of a machine instead of being directed at a 
fraction (or zone) of the refrigerated volume as measured by the 
average temperature of the standard test packages in the furthest from 
the next-to-vend product locations, which would be required to be no 
more than 10 [deg]F above the integrated average temperature of the 
standard test packages in the next-to-vend product locations. 79 FR 
46908, 46916 (Aug. 11, 2014).
    The proposed definition was predicated upon the different methods 
of cooling used in Class A and Class B machines and the customer 
utility provided by fully cooling the refrigerated space. Maintaining 
all refrigerated beverages within 10 [deg]F of the next-to-vend 
beverage temperature typically allows customers to select from more 
beverages and ensures that the customer will receive a properly cooled 
product, regardless of the product's vertical location in the machine. 
79 FR at 46915-46917. DOE selected a temperature range of 10 [deg]F, 
based on feedback from manufacturers, as a reasonable temperature bound 
to differentiate fully cooled beverage vending machines. DOE also 
verified this proposed temperature range based on limited testing of 
beverage vending machines currently available on the market to 
determine the typical temperature variability observed between the 
next-to-vend and furthest from next-to-vend beverages in Class A and 
Class B equipment, respectively. Id.
    To accompany DOE's proposed definition of fully cooled, the 2014 
BVM test procedure NOPR also proposed to adopt an optional test method 
that could be used to quantitatively differentiate between Class A and 
Class B equipment. To confirm whether a given BVM model is fully 
cooled, DOE proposed that temperature measurements be taken at the 
next-to-vend and furthest from next-to-vend temperature positions to 
confirm the proposed 10 [deg]F temperature differential. For beverage 
vending machines with horizontal product rows, or spirals, DOE's 
proposed test procedure required a standard test package at the back of 
the horizontal product rows in the four corners of the machine (e.g., 
bottom right, bottom left, top right, and top left). For beverage 
vending machines with standard products configured in a vertical stack, 
the proposal included an additional standard test package at the top of 
each stack. To determine if a given beverage vending machine is fully 
cooled, manufacturers would calculate the average temperature of the 
standard test packages in the furthest from the next-to-vend product 
location over the entire test period and compare that value to the 
integrated average temperature of standard test packages in the next-
to-vend beverage positions. If the difference between these two values 
was less than or equal to 10 [deg]F, the tested unit would be 
considered fully cooled. 79 FR at 46917.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE noted that this test 
method would not be required to certify equipment, but would be the 
method used by DOE to determine the appropriate equipment class for 
enforcement purposes. Therefore, DOE noted that its proposed definition 
and test method would not require manufacturers to take any additional 
temperature measurements beyond what is currently specified in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 and, as such, would not increase the burden 
associated with conducting the DOE BVM test procedure. Id.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comments on its 
proposed definition of ``fully cooled'' and the proposed fully cooled 
validation test method. DOE was particularly interested in whether the 
proposed definition aligns with the classifications of Class A and 
Class B equipment currently used in industry. Id.
    ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated they are considering the removal of product 
class definitions from the new ASHRAE test method. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, 
No. 0011 at p. 3) Coca-Cola commented that configurations such as 
``zone cooled'' and ``fully cooled'' did not apply to the test method, 
but to how the machine was rated. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.4) 
Similarly, SVA commented that two classifications for beverage vending 
machines were not needed. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) SVA also suggested 
that DOE use the same test procedure for both classes. (SVA, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 50-55)
    In response to the definition of ``fully cooled'' proposed in the 
BVM test procedure NOPR, several interested parties recommended that 
DOE consider an alternate differentiation between equipment types to 
better capture differences in energy consumption, and suggested the 
presence of a transparent or opaque front and the arrangement of 
products within the machine as potential differentiating criteria that 
are more appropriate and consistent with the differentiation between 
equipment configurations applied in industry. (CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 
1; Sanden Vendo America Inc., Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 
52). Many interested parties also commented regarding the difficulty of 
establishing a quantitative temperature threshold to differentiate 
fully cooled equipment from non-fully cooled equipment that would be 
applicable across all BVM models. (AMS, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 
0004 at p. 54; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 1). Coca-
Cola and SVA also noted the potential for additional burden associated 
with the fully cooled verification test procedure. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 
at p. 4; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2)
    DOE considered all the comments received regarding the 
classification of beverage vending machines based on the definition of 
``fully cooled.'' In light of the extent and scope of the comments 
received in response to the amendments proposed in the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR regarding the proposed definition of fully cooled, 
alternative criteria for differentiating Class A and Class B equipment, 
and the optional fully cooled verification test protocol, DOE wishes to 
further consider potential classification options and criteria 
suggested by interested parties. As such, DOE will respond to these 
comments raised by interested parties and propose an alternative 
approach as a part of the associated ongoing energy conservation 
standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022)). This 
approach will provide interested parties an additional opportunity to 
provide DOE with feedback and suggestions regarding the appropriate 
classification criteria and definitions for Class A and Class B 
beverage vending machines.
9. Placement of Thermocouples During Testing
    The DOE test procedure established by the 2006 BVM test procedure 
final rule does not specify how to position thermocouple wires during 
testing. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify 
that, in order to avoid compromising the thermal integrity of the 
vending machine, thermocouple wires should not be run through the 
dispensing door. Instead, the wires should be fed through the

[[Page 45772]]

door gasket, as it will mold around them and maintain a better thermal 
seal for the cooled compartment. DOE proposed to add text to the BVM 
test procedure in Appendices A and B specifying that sensors shall be 
installed in a manner that does not affect energy performance. 
Specifically, DOE proposed to amend the regulatory text to require that 
thermocouple wires be run through the door gasket and not through the 
dispensing door of the beverage vending machine such that the sensor 
pathway is sealed to prohibit airflow between the interior refrigerated 
volume and the ambient room air. 79 FR 46908, 46917-46918 (Aug. 11, 
2014).
    In response to DOE's proposal regarding the routing of temperature 
sensors and associated wiring, AMS, SVA, Royal Vendors, and Crane 
Merchandising Systems (CMS) commented at the NOPR public meeting they 
should be able to route thermocouples using whatever method was best 
for their machine, including destructive methods such as drilling 
holes. (AMS, No. 0004 at pp. 59-62; SVA, No. 0004 at pp. 62-63; Royal 
Vendors, No. 0004 at pp. 63-64; CMS, No. 0004 at p. 65) Royal Vendors 
emphasized that the routing method used by other manufactures would not 
work for their machines and noted that they route thermocouple wire 
through a removable panel in the base of the machine where the 
refrigerant lines enter the machine. (Royal Vendors, No. 0004 at pp. 
63-64) CMS suggested that DOE did not need to provide specificity as to 
the placement of thermocouples for testing beyond requiring that they 
be routed in a manner to reduce airflow and not run through the 
dispensing door. (CMS, No. 0004 at p. 65) AMS suggested that 
manufacturers could provide documentation with their certification 
reports regarding the method that was used to route thermocouples when 
testing the beverage vending machine to establish the certified rating. 
AMS also recommended that DOE use the same method used by manufacturers 
when conducting enforcement testing to ensure consistent results. (AMS, 
No. 0004 at pp. 59-61) SVA also recommended DOE consider the reduction 
of thermocouple placements in Class A ``shelf style'' beverage vending 
machines in order to reduce the effects of airflow caused by 
thermocouple wire routing. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1)
    DOE considered all the comments received regarding the placement of 
thermocouples during testing. Manufacturers commented that many methods 
may be used to route thermocouples and DOE should not limit the 
allowable methods, since some methods are more feasible than the others 
based on the specific equipment design. However, DOE acknowledges that 
without specific, verifiable requirements, it is difficult to ensure 
testing is conducted in accordance with any such test procedure 
requirement. This is an issue both for certification testing, and for 
ensuring repeatability of test results in DOE assessment and 
enforcement testing.
    As such, in this final rule, DOE maintains that the thermocouple 
wires should not be run through dispensing doors compromising the 
thermal integrity of the equipment, but instead should be run through 
the door gasket or other alternate routes that would not affect the 
performance of the machine. DOE is adopting requirements regarding 
routing of thermocouples and other sensor wires in section 2.2.2 of 
Appendices A and B.
    DOE does not intend to limit the manner in which manufacturers 
could route thermocouple wire when conducting certification testing and 
will continue to allow manufacturers to use whatever method they deem 
appropriate, including drilling holes in the side of the beverage 
vending machine through which the thermocouple wire can be routed and 
caulked in place to limit airflow. However, DOE notes that, even with 
precise documentation, it may be difficult to repeat exactly what was 
done by manufacturers during certification testing. Further, DOE does 
not typically employ methods that require physical destruction or 
permanent modification of the unit when conducting assessment or 
enforcement testing. Therefore, when testing a BVM model during 
assessment or enforcement testing, DOE will route thermocouple wire 
through the door gasket such that the malleable gasket material is 
compressed around the thermocouple wire to ensure a good seal and 
prohibiting airflow between the interior refrigerated volume and the 
ambient test chamber air. If a manufacturer uses a specific method for 
routing of the thermocouple wires during their own certification 
testing, it must document these specific steps as part of the test data 
records maintained by the manufacturer in accordance with 10 CFR 
429.71.
10. Establishing Testing Provisions at the Lowest Application Product 
Temperature
    The DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines requires that 
an average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F 
be maintained throughout the test, as discussed in section III.A.7 of 
this final rule. While DOE recognizes that the majority of covered 
beverage vending machines can be tested at the established rating 
temperature of 36 [deg]F, DOE is aware of some unique BVM models that 
are designed to operate much higher than 36 [deg]F and cannot operate 
at 36 [deg]F, and thus cannot be tested in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure. Manufacturers of such equipment currently must request a 
test procedure waiver to comply with DOE's energy conservation 
standards in accordance with 10 CFR 431.401.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ DOE issued a final rule amending its regulations governing 
petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for 
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. 79 FR 
26591 (May 9, 2014). This final rule was effective on June 9, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed 
amendments to its test procedure for beverage vending machines to allow 
covered beverage vending machines that cannot achieve an average next-
to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F to instead be 
tested at their lowest application product temperature. 79 FR 46908, 
46418 (Aug. 11, 2014).
    DOE proposed that the lowest application product temperature would 
describe the lowest temperature at which a beverage vending machine 
model is capable of maintaining next-to-vend beverages and could 
correspond to the lowest setting on a unit's thermostat. For beverage 
vending machines that cannot maintain an average next-to-vend 
temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F, the lowest application 
product temperature provision would specify a revised average beverage 
temperature for beverages in the next-to-vend product location, but 
would not modify any other requirements of the DOE test procedure. 
Equipment tested and certified using the lowest application product 
temperature would be required to meet the standard applicable for its 
equipment class and refrigerated volume, and the manufacturer would be 
required to maintain records of the lowest application product 
temperature at which a given model was rated. Id.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comments on its 
proposal to adopt a lowest application product temperature provision 
for covered beverage vending machines that cannot be tested at the 
specified average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 
[deg]F.
    DOE received several comments on the applicability of establishing 
testing provisions at the lowest application product temperature. AMS 
and SVA

[[Page 45773]]

noted that all their machines can meet the 36 [deg]F requirement. (CMS, 
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 75-76; SVA, Public Meeting 
Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 71-72) However, AMS commented that they 
have machines where the lowest temperature setting is 40 [deg]F and 
special software is required to set the system at 36 [deg]F. (AMS, 
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 71)
    DOE received several comments in support of the proposed lowest 
application product temperature provision. Specifically, Coca-Cola 
agreed with DOE that the lowest application temperature should be used 
only when the average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F could not be achieved; in cases where 36 [deg]F could 
not be achieved, the ``lowest application temperature'' should be the 
average temperature for which a 1 [deg]F tolerance is 
maintained for steady state operation. However, Coca-Cola added that 
the lowest application product temperature should not be based on the 
thermostat set point, but instead should be based on the lowest 
temperature the case is designed to operate at as specified by the 
manufacturer. Coca-Cola further commented that lowest application 
product temperature should only be applicable to cases that cannot 
operate as cold as 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F; it should not be 
applicable to machines designed to vend frozen products such as ice or 
ice cream. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 5) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 also supported 
DOE's proposal to adopt a lowest application product temperature 
provision for covered beverage vending machines that cannot be tested 
at the specified average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F, but recommends that the scope be limited to beverage 
vending machines only, and not machines designed exclusively to vend 
snacks or other perishable products. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 
3)
    CA IOUs also expressed their support of the alternative lowest 
application product temperature provision for beverage vending machines 
that cannot be tested at 36 [deg]F, but suggested that the test 
procedure include a requirement for the manufacturer to indicate the 
temperature at which the beverage vending machine was tested. (CA IOUs, 
No. 0005 at p. 2)
    SVA disagreed with DOE's proposal to test units at the lowest 
application temperature, but noted that if allowed, the product should 
be identified within a different classification, and the temperature 
must be clearly labeled on the machine and identified in the DOE 
listing. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) CMS also suggested that a new class of 
equipment be introduced for models that cannot meet the 36 [deg]F 
requirement to help people differentiate energy efficient models from 
those that are not tested at the 36 [deg]F requirement. (CMS, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 77-80) NEEA commented that beverage 
vending machines that do not go down to 36 [deg]F may pass the DOE test 
but be ``energy hogs.'' (NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at 
p. 72-75) Coca-Cola commented that refrigerated vending machines which 
had their lowest applicable product temperature substantially higher 
than 36 [deg]F were likely not beverage vending machines and that they 
should therefore not be included in this test procedure, but instead 
receive some alternative treatment. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 5)
    Regarding how to determine the lowest application product 
temperature for applicable equipment, AMS recommended that the lowest 
application product temperature be determined by actual measurement 
when the machine is operating at its lowest temperature. (AMS, No. 0007 
at p. 4) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that the lowest thermostat setting 
would be a reasonable approach for most equipment, but emphasized that 
the reported lowest application product temperature should be the 
integrated average temperature measurement, not the thermostat set 
point. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3) NEEA suggested that a 
proportional method of scaling the allowable energy consumption based 
on the change in temperature could be used for equipment that cannot 
reach the 36 [deg]F requirement. (NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 
0004 at pp. 82-83) SVA commented that determining energy use can be 
more complicated than just proportional scaling. (SVA, No. 0004-1 at p. 
84)
    Coca-Cola commented that testing a beverage vending machine by the 
proposed clarifications of Appendix A would render different test 
results from the current test method due to changes in temperatures and 
the treatment of accessories. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 1)
    DOE considered all comments submitted by interested parties 
regarding testing at the lowest application product temperature. 
Commenters generally agreed with DOE's proposal to test equipment that 
cannot be operated at an integrated average temperature of 36 [deg]F 
 1 [deg]F at the lowest application product temperature, 
and stated that the manufacturer should be required to record the 
integrated average temperature at which the machine is rated. Thus, in 
this final rule, DOE is adopting provisions in section 2.1.3 of 
Appendices A and B to test beverage vending machines that cannot be 
operated at an average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F to instead be tested at their lowest application 
product temperature, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
    Some commenters also mentioned that machines tested at the lowest 
application product temperature should be identified in a different 
classification, and that the temperature should be identified on the 
label and in the DOE listing. DOE notes that DOE's proposal regarding 
the lowest application product temperature test provisions included a 
requirement to report the lowest application product temperature of a 
BVM basic model to DOE in the BVM basic model's certification report. 
In this final rule, DOE is also specifying that equipment tested and 
certified using the lowest application product temperature will be 
required to meet the standard applicable for its equipment class and 
refrigerated volume. DOE acknowledges that it will be easier for such 
equipment to meet the applicable energy conservation standard, as the 
energy use of beverage vending machines is a function of the 
temperature differential between the refrigerated temperature and the 
ambient conditions. Since the lowest application product temperature 
test provisions require a higher integrated average temperature, the 
measured DEC would be lower than a similar case tested at 36 [deg]F 
 1 [deg]F. DOE reiterates that the lowest application 
product temperature test provisions are only applicable to equipment 
that cannot be operated at 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F and, as 
such, believes such test provisions will only be applicable to a small 
number of models. Therefore, DOE does not believe separate standards 
for such equipment are justified. In response to NEEA's proposal to 
scale the applicable MDEC based on the temperature differential between 
the tested lowest application product temperature and the specified 
rating temperature of 36 [deg]F, DOE agrees with SVA that determining 
the appropriate energy conservation standard level can be more 
complicated than just proportional scaling. For example, fixed energy 
consuming components, such as lighting and display signage, will not 
scale based on the temperature differential between the refrigerated 
compartment and the ambient air. However, DOE will monitor the number 
of models certifying under the lowest application product temperature 
provisions and, if a significant portion or increase in BVM

[[Page 45774]]

models using such provisions is observed, take any necessary corrective 
action at that time.
    DOE agrees with Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1's comment that the 
lowest application product temperature provisions should be limited to 
refrigerated beverage vending machines that operate warmer than 36 
[deg]F  1 [deg]F and not freezers or other categories of 
equipment that are not intended to vend sealed beverages, since 
beverage vending machines are limited to commercial refrigerators. DOE 
notes that this test procedure and the lowest application product 
temperature provisions are only applicable to equipment that meets 
DOE's definition of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine; namely equipment that (1) is a commercial refrigerator, (2) 
refrigerates sealed beverages and (3) dispenses such sealed beverages 
on payment. 10 CFR 431.292. In the 2014 commercial refrigeration 
equipment test procedure final rule, DOE adopted a new definition of 
commercial refrigerator, defined as a unit of commercial refrigeration 
equipment in which all refrigerated compartments in the unit are 
capable of operating at or above 32 [deg]F  2 [deg]F. 79 FR 
22278, 22307-22308 (April 21, 2014). DOE has determined that this 
definition is also applicable to beverage vending machines. As such, to 
clarify that DOE's BVM test procedure and energy conservation standards 
only apply to refrigerated equipment and not freezers that operate 
below 32 [deg]F, in this final rule, DOE is amending the definition of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine to explicitly 
reference the definition of commercial refrigerator located at 10 CFR 
431.62. DOE notes that amending the definition of a refrigerated 
bottled or canned beverage vending machine is necessary since the term 
``commercial refrigerator'' is referenced in the existing definition, 
but the definition did not explicitly establish that the term 
``commercial refrigerator'' refers to that defined under subpart C to 
part 431 of title 10 of the CFR, which pertains to commercial 
refrigeration equipment. DOE believes this effectively responds to 
Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1's comments as, in DOE's view, it is 
extremely unlikely that a beverage vending machine would be unable to 
operate at 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F and still be able to operate 
at or above 32 [deg]F  2 [deg]F. A beverage vending machine 
that operates only between 32 and 34 [deg]F, however unlikely, would 
meet DOE's definition of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage 
vending machine. In such a case, the beverage vending machine could be 
rated under the lowest application product temperature provision, as 
adopted, and the lowest application product temperature provision would 
be 34 [deg]F.
    DOE acknowledges ASHRAE SPC 32.1's affirmation of DOE's proposal 
that the lowest application product temperature should be determined 
for equipment with thermostats by the lowest thermostat setting. In 
response to Coca-Cola's comment that the lowest application product 
temperature should not be based on the thermostat set point, but 
instead should be based on the lowest temperature the case is designed 
to operate at as specified by the manufacturer, DOE notes that such a 
requirement may be difficult to enforce and could create a loophole 
whereby equipment could advertise temperatures above 38 [deg]F, but be 
able to operate as cold as 36 [deg]F in the field. Therefore, in this 
final rule, DOE is electing to maintain the specification that, for 
equipment with a thermostat, the reported lowest application product 
temperature is the actual measured integrated average temperature when 
the thermostat is set at its lowest setting and not the reading on the 
thermostat, as suggested by ASHRAE and AMS. As DOE did not receive any 
comments on the specification of the lowest application product 
temperature for equipment without thermostats, DOE is not including any 
additional specificity in determining the lowest application product 
temperature for such equipment at this time. However, DOE notes that 
documentation supporting the determination of the LAPT should be 
included as part of the test data records maintained by the 
manufacturer in accordance with 10 CFR 429.71 underlying certification.
    Regarding Coca-Cola's comment that testing using the lowest 
application product temperature may have an impact on the measured DEC, 
DOE acknowledges that changes in the integrated average temperature of 
the interior refrigerated volume will alter the measured DEC of BVM 
models. However, as stated earlier, DOE notes that such a provision is 
only applicable to equipment that cannot operate at 36 [deg]F  1 [deg]F and DOE believes this represents very few models. Also, 
under the BVM test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure 
final rule, such equipment would be required to apply for a waiver, 
since it currently cannot be tested. To date, DOE has not received any 
waiver requests regarding BVM models that cannot operate at the 
appropriate rating temperature.
    With respect to the comment from AMS that some models may be 
produced such that the lowest temperature setting is greater than the 
test temperature specified by the DOE test procedure and special 
software is required to set the system at 36 [deg]F, DOE notes that all 
beverage vending machines must be tested and certified as shipped and 
designed for use in the field. Therefore the use of specific controls 
designed solely for use when testing the equipment that are not 
available to a purchaser or operator of the equipment would not be 
allowed in the DOE test procedure. If the machine, as distributed in 
commerce, is unable to meet the temperature requirements of the DOE 
test procedure, then the machine would be tested using its lowest 
application product temperature as discussed in section III.A.10 of 
this final rule.
11. Treatment of Certain Accessories During Testing
    In reviewing the DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines, 
DOE recognized that the existing test procedure does not clearly 
specify the appropriate operation of some components and accessories 
when conducting the test procedure. DOE understands that there is room 
for various interpretations of the requirements for equipment 
configuration where the DOE test procedure is currently ambiguous or 
silent. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify 
the proper configuration and operation of several specific components 
and accessories in the DOE test procedure to remove this ambiguity and 
improve the repeatability of the DOE test procedure. 79 FR 46908, 
46919-46922 (Aug. 11, 2014).
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify that, 
in general, any accessory or component that is integral to the intended 
operation of the beverage vending machine must be operational during 
the test. In this context, DOE interpreted ``integral'' to mean 
necessary for operation of the BVM model in a manner that meets the DOE 
definition of beverage vending machine--i.e., necessary for the BVM 
model to cool bottled or canned beverages and/or dispense bottled or 
canned beverages on payment. In addition, DOE proposed to clarify that 
any manually controllable energy-consuming accessories that are 
integral to the performance of the BVM refrigeration system must be in 
place during testing if offered for sale with that basic model and must 
be tested at the most energy-consuming setting. DOE

[[Page 45775]]

also proposed that accessories that are controlled by automatic 
controls and are not configurable by the BVM operator must be tested in 
the automatic state. Id. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE 
proposed to clarify these requirements by adding language in Appendices 
A and B regarding the appropriate treatment of components and 
accessories during testing. 79 FR at 46935, 46937.
    In addition to these general requirements, DOE believed it would be 
clearer and more precise to specify, to the extent possible, the 
appropriate treatment of several common components and accessories that 
might typically be found on beverage vending machines. Therefore, in 
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also proposed to include 
provisions regarding the treatment of 11 specific components, including 
(1) payment mechanisms; (2) interior lighting; (3) external customer 
display signs, lights, or digital screens; (4) anti-sweat and other 
electric resistance heaters; (5) condensate pan heaters; (6) 
illuminated temperature displays; (7) condensate filters; (8) security 
covers; (9) coated coils; (10) general purpose outlets; and (11) 
crankcase heaters and electric resistance heaters for cold weather. 79 
FR at 46919-46922, 46935-46938.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also emphasized that the 
proposed clarifications served only to unambiguously clarify the intent 
of the current DOE test procedure and, as such, would be required for 
equipment testing as of 180 days after publication of this final rule.
    In response to DOE's proposed treatment of accessories in general, 
DOE received multiple comments regarding the treatment of accessories 
not discussed explicitly in section III.A.11 of the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR and their configuration during testing. ASHRAE SPC 32.1, 
Coca-Cola, and California IOUs agreed with DOE that the test procedure 
should include components required to maintain the primary operation of 
the machine to represent field performance, including components used 
for maintaining product temperatures, accepting payment, allowing user 
selection of product, and vending product during testing. (ASHRAE SPC 
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7; CA IOUs, No. 0005 
at p.2) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 listed the following as potential accessories 
that could be included on a beverage vending machine: payment devices 
(e.g., coin mechanisms, bill validators, credit card readers, and 
mobile phone payment), ADA accessibility equipment, screens (e.g., 
product selection touchscreens and pure advertisement screens), 
computers that interface with screens, Wi-Fi routers, trash compactors, 
and cold weather heating elements. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at pp. 3-
4)
    AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola also supported DOE's proposal in Appendix A 
to de-energize accessories non-essential to the vending process and 
unnecessary to the machine's basic operation and they agreed that such 
systems should be on if required for product selection or vending. 
However, they commented that secondary systems, including secondary 
payment systems, should not be required during testing. (AMS, No. 0007 
at pp. 4-7; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7) 
Specifically, Coca-Cola noted that new beverage vending machines are 
being developed that incorporate new capabilities, utilize additional 
transformative technologies, and are more innovative, and they 
acknowledged that these additional services will add to the energy 
consumption of the beverage vending machine in the field. (Coca-Cola, 
No. 0010 at p. 8) Coca-Cola provided the following list of potential 
accessories that could be included on a beverage vending machine: 
reverse vending systems for waste management, message displays and 
interactive video walls not necessary for product selection, television 
monitors, routers, and communication systems such as modems and blue-
tooth devices, consumer award management systems (that may receive caps 
or coupons), and additional secondary payment systems (e.g., card 
readers, key-fob readers). (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6) However, Coca-
Cola recommended that these features not be considered when 
establishing a basic rating for the equipment as a beverage vending 
machine. Coca-Cola further recommended that, if such energy consumption 
were to be considered, the equipment be subject to different standards 
that account for the additional functionality the machines provide. 
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
    AMS noted that they had encountered beverage vending machines with 
a wide variety of accessories, including cell phone/laptop battery 
chargers, Wi-Fi hotspots, reverse vending equipment (trash compactors), 
and power assist features for handicapped consumers, in addition to the 
accessories outlined in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR. AMS agreed 
with DOE's proposal that such accessories be de-energized or set to 
their lowest energy consuming state during testing under Appendix A. 
However, in Appendix B, AMS recommended that such accessories only be 
de-energized or set to their lowest energy consuming state if the BVM 
controls would cause the accessories to automatically enter such states 
under the conditions of the test. AMS clarified that, if such 
accessories can be configured to operate at all times, they should be 
left energized and operating during the test to capture the 
representative field performance of the unit. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 6-
7)
    California IOUs agreed with AMS that the energy consumption of such 
features should be captured, and they recommended that the new test 
procedure have provisions for including new but prevalent accessories 
like networking capabilities and large displays while testing. (CA 
IOUs, No. 0005 at p.2)
    DOE agrees with the comments received from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Coca-
Cola, California IOUs, SVA, and AMS suggesting that the operation of 
components necessary to provide the ``primary functionality'' of the 
beverage vending machine as it would be installed in the field should 
be operational during testing. DOE interprets ``components necessary 
for primary functionality'' to mean the components necessary to cool 
products and vend products on payment. However, as discussed further in 
section III.A.11.a, in response to comments from SVA, AMS, and Coca-
Cola, DOE is also allowing for flexibility regarding the treatment of 
payment mechanisms to accommodate typical equipment testing practices 
in the industry.
    DOE is adopting clarifying language in Appendices A and B 
specifying that the rated beverage vending machine must only include 
sufficient functionality necessary for cooling and vending sealed 
beverages (except for payment mechanisms) during testing, including 
functionality necessary for temperature management, product inventory, 
product merchandising, product selection, and product transport and 
delivery. Appendices A and B will further specify that any accessories 
not fundamental to the primary operation of the equipment be de-
energized during testing, or placed in the lowest energy consuming 
state if the component cannot be de-energized without affecting the 
fundamental functionality of the beverage vending machine. That is, if 
the accessory or component is required for the BVM model to cool 
bottled or canned beverages and/or dispense bottled or canned beverages 
on payment, then the accessory is required to be in place and 
operational during testing. Accessories such as reverse vending for 
waste management, wireless

[[Page 45776]]

portals, and other systems that do not impact the performance of the 
machine must be de-energized during testing, or placed in the lowest 
energy consuming state. DOE notes that this language and approach is 
consistent with that being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1.
    DOE believes that testing with only those devices and accessories 
necessary for primary functionality of the beverage vending machine for 
its fundamental purpose of cooling and vending refrigerated beverages 
provides a representative and consistent basis for comparing the energy 
performance of beverage vending machines. DOE acknowledges the concerns 
of interested parties that additional accessories may increase the 
energy consumption of beverage vending machines in the field. However, 
as noted by Coca-Cola, these functions are secondary and tangential to 
the functionality of the equipment as a beverage vending machine. DOE 
also agrees with commenters that, given the number and variety of such 
potential accessories, it is more consistent and straightforward to 
test equipment with any such auxiliary features de-energized or placed 
in the lowest energy consuming state.
    In response to AMS's comment that only those devices that are 
automatically placed in their lowest energy consuming state when 
installed and energized be allowed to enter such a state during 
testing, DOE believes that its adopted approach provides the most 
representative, repeatable, and comparable performance for tested BVM 
equipment. However, DOE notes that under Appendix A, any components or 
accessories that are controlled by automatic controls that are 
permanently operational and cannot be adjusted by the machine operator 
must be operated in the automatic state, in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 
23.1-2010. In Appendix B, DOE is adopting more specific treatment for 
automatic controls, including both those that can be adjusted by the 
machine operator and those that cannot. DOE's provisions for these 
``accessory low power mode'' controls are described further in section 
III.B.2.
    Coca-Cola also commented that testing a beverage vending machine 
using the proposed clarifications of Appendix A would render different 
test results from the current test method due to changes in 
temperatures and treatment of accessories. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 
1)
    In response to Coca-Cola's comment that the amendments in Appendix 
A will affect the measured energy consumption of refrigerated beverage 
vending machines, DOE reiterates that the measured energy consumption 
under the DOE test procedure is not affected; the amendments and 
clarifications included in Appendix A serve only to clarify the 
provisions of the existing BVM test procedure and ensure equipment are 
tested consistently among manufacturers and test labs.
    The following sections III.A.11.a through III.A.11.k discuss the 
proposed treatment of 11 specific features, components, and accessories 
under the DOE test procedure, as well as any comments received and the 
specific amendments DOE is adopting in this final rule for those 11 
specific components.
a. Payment Mechanisms
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE stated its belief that 
payment mechanisms are integral to the vending function of the beverage 
vending machine and, accordingly, should be in place and functional 
during testing. Specifically, DOE proposed that when testing a vending 
machine, the most energy-consuming combination of payment mechanisms 
should be used. 79 FR 46908, 46919 (Aug. 11, 2014). DOE also noted that 
all other BVM models equipped with less energy-consumptive combinations 
of payment mechanisms may be listed as different individual models 
covered under that basic model or as unique basic models, if 
manufacturers wish to certify and make representations regarding the 
energy use of each combination of money processing equipment. Id.
    In response to DOE's proposal, AMS objected to the inclusion of any 
money processing accessories as part of Appendix A or Appendix B during 
testing based on the fact that beverage vending machines usually are 
not shipped with these accessories and that most, if not all, of the 
BVM manufacturers currently omit these accessories while testing. (AMS, 
No. 0007 at pp. 4-5) SVA urged DOE to not consider payment mechanisms 
during testing because of the large number of variations involved, 
keeping the baseline more consistent across models and manufacturers. 
(SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) AMS and SVA also noted that including payment 
mechanisms would make the testing process burdensome, as there are a 
large number of different models and manufacturers of these money 
processing accessories. (AMS, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at 
pp. 120-121; SVA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 121-122 
and SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) Coca-Cola commented that machines are 
typically sold without payment systems and disagreed with DOE's 
analysis that the most energy-consuming combination of payment 
mechanisms be used for the test. Additionally, Coca-Cola noted that 
manufacturers had standard payment systems for machines, and 
recommended that the standard payment systems be used for the test. 
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7) Conversely, NEEA commented that the test 
procedure should include payment mechanisms, as this reflects field 
conditions. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 2) During the public meeting, SVA and 
NEEA suggested that payment mechanisms should be included as part of 
Appendix B only. (SVA, No. 0004 at pp. 121-122; NEEA, No. 0004 at pp. 
122-123)
    DOE considered all comments received regarding the treatment of 
payment mechanisms in developing the provisions adopted in this final 
rule. DOE agrees with the comment from NEEA that payment mechanisms 
should be included in the test procedure to reflect field conditions. 
However, DOE understands that due to the wide variety of available 
payment mechanism combinations, determining and testing with the most 
energy-consuming combination of payment mechanisms may be burdensome 
for manufacturers. DOE realizes that, as beverage vending machines are 
often sold or shipped without payment mechanisms in place, BVM 
manufacturers may not have control or knowledge of the payment 
mechanism that may be installed in the field and, as such, selecting 
the most energy-consuming combination, as originally proposed by DOE, 
may not be feasible.
    Based on the comments submitted by interested parties, DOE 
considered several options to account for the energy use of payment the 
mechanisms. Given that payment mechanisms are variable and are not 
always included in the machine at the time of sale, DOE understands 
that it is difficult to unambiguously specify a ``representative'' 
payment mechanism or device combination that would be applicable to all 
BVM basic models and consistent across all units of each model. With 
this in mind, DOE believes that conducting physical testing of beverage 
vending machines with no payment mechanisms installed, as opposed to 
testing with the payment mechanisms in place, is the most 
straightforward, repeatable, and unambiguous approach. DOE notes that 
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is also currently considering updating ASHRAE 32.1 to 
specify that testing be performed without payment mechanisms installed.

[[Page 45777]]

    However, DOE maintains that payment mechanisms are integral to the 
vending function of the beverage vending machine and, therefore, 
represent part of the primary functionality of the beverage vending 
machine, as discussed in III.A.11. Accordingly, DOE believes that it is 
important for the energy consumption of a payment mechanism to be 
captured in the DEC of a beverage vending machine. To provide a 
standardized and consistent method of accounting for payment mechanism 
energy consumption when a BVM model is being tested without such a 
device or devices installed, DOE is specifying a default energy 
consumption value for payment mechanisms that will be added to the 
tested primary rated energy consumption per day (ED) shown 
in section 7.2.3.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 to determine the DEC of 
tested equipment.
    To determine the default payment mechanism energy consumption value 
that would be representative of the typical energy consumption of such 
devices in the field, DOE conducted a search of available payment 
mechanisms for beverage vending machines and their respective published 
power or energy consumption values. Through this search, DOE found 25 
different models of payment mechanisms: 11 coin mechanisms, 11 bill 
validators, and 3 credit card readers. DOE found that coin mechanisms 
have an average idle mode power consumption of 7.1W, while bill 
validators have an average idle mode power consumption of 6.8W and 
credit card readers have an average idle mode power consumption of 12W. 
DOE referenced the idle mode energy consumption of these devices 
because no vending occurs during the BVM test procedure.
    DOE calculated the average daily energy consumption for each device 
category based on the average power consumption estimates for each of 
the three payment mechanism categories. DOE estimates that coin 
mechanisms consume approximately 0.17 kWh/day, bill validators consume 
approximately 0.16 kWh/day, and credit card readers consume 
approximately 0.29 kWh/day. DOE notes that these values are 
representative of the amount of energy such devices would consume if 
installed on a beverage vending machine tested in accordance with the 
DOE test procedure. After considering these representative energy 
consumption values and the variability in the payment mechanism 
available to the manufacturer to install in the machine, DOE weighted 
the average daily energy consumption of the three most comment payment 
mechanisms. Since credit card readers are often leased from a separate 
company, the energy consumption of coin mechanisms and bill validators 
were weighted more heavily than the energy consumption of credit card 
readers. After weighting the representative energy consumption values, 
DOE determined that a default daily energy consumption value of 0.20 
kWh/day is an appropriate representative value for the energy 
consumption associated with payment mechanisms. This value is also 
representative of a worst-case coin mechanism or bill validator because 
it is higher than the average energy consumption of the coin mechanisms 
or bill validators. DOE acknowledges that any given BVM basic model may 
have a payment mechanism or combination of payment mechanisms that uses 
more or less energy than this default value when installed in the 
field. However, for the purposes of rating equipment based on testing 
conducted in accordance with the DOE test procedure, the beverage 
vending machine shall be tested without any payment mechanism installed 
(or with any existing payment mechanisms de-energized or set to the 
lowest energy consuming state, if it cannot be de-energized) and the 
DEC rating shall be determined as the sum of the measured primary daily 
energy consumption per day and the default payment mechanism energy 
consumption value (0.20 kWh/day). Any representations regarding the 
energy consumption of equipment rated under this approach must be made 
based on this calculated DEC, regardless of the payment mechanism or 
combination of payment mechanisms with which any given BVM unit is 
actually sold.
    Regarding the comment from Coca-Cola that manufacturers may wish to 
test with standard payment systems for the beverage vending machines 
they produce, DOE wishes to clarify that manufacturers must make 
representations regarding the energy consumption of beverage vending 
machines based on the testing and calculations performed under the DOE 
test procedure. DOE surveyed many BVM manufacturers and payment 
mechanism manufacturers regarding the existence of any default or 
``standard'' payment mechanism device and was not able to identify one 
that was applicable to all BVM manufacturers and models. As such, DOE 
is instead adopting an approach whereby beverage vending machines that 
differ only based on number and type of payment mechanism may be 
certified under a single basic model listing based on the tested energy 
consumption of the BVM model with no payment mechanism installed (or 
the payment mechanism de-energized or set to the lowest energy 
consuming state, if it cannot be de-energized) plus the 0.20 kWh/day 
default energy consumption value for payment mechanisms.
    In response to SVA and NEEA's suggestion that DOE include the 
energy consumption of payment mechanisms in Appendix B only, DOE 
reiterates its belief that money processing is an integral part of the 
primary functionality of the beverage vending machine, namely the 
vending function. DOE disagrees that the current test procedure does 
not include the energy consumption of the payment mechanisms. In fact, 
the current DOE test procedure for BVMs at 10 CFR 431.294(b) requires 
testing in accordance with the test procedures specified in section 4, 
``Instruments,'' section 5, ``Vending Machine Capacity,'' section 6, 
``Test Conditions,'' and sections 7.1 through 7.2.3.2, under ``Test 
Procedures,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, ``Methods of Testing 
for Rating Vending Machines for Bottled, Canned, and Other Sealed 
Beverages.'' (Incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293). More 
specifically, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 states that the machine 
shall be ``installed in accordance with the manufacturer's 
instructions'' and ``operated with normal lighting and control 
settings, using only those energy management controls that are 
permanently operational and not capable of being adjusted by a machine 
operator'' (7.1.1(a) and (d), respectively). DOE has interpreted these 
provisions of the test procedure as requiring the BVM to be tested with 
the payment mechanism as it would be installed in the field. As such, 
DOE is continuing to require testing of beverage vending machines in a 
manner that accounts for the energy consumption of all features that 
contribute to the primary functionality of the beverage vending 
machine, including payment mechanisms, in both Appendix A and Appendix 
B. Given the comment we received in response to DOE's proposal in the 
NOPR, DOE believes that it is important to clarify and streamline the 
applicability of the current test procedure provisions in Appendix A to 
reduce burden on manufacturers. Consequently, DOE is adopting a 
streamlined method of calculating and including the energy use with a 
typical payment system in sections 2.2.3.1 and 2.3 of Appendix A

[[Page 45778]]

and sections 2.2.5.1 and 2.3 of Appendix B.
b. Interior Lighting
    Beverage vending machines typically include lighting to illuminate 
the vendible products, in the case of Class A equipment, or illuminate 
display panels that are part of the physical walls of the beverage 
vending machine, in the case of Class B equipment. In both cases, these 
lights are internal to the physical walls of the beverage vending 
machine and, thus, are deemed integral to the operation of the 
equipment. Through incorporation of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the 
DOE test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule 
currently requires beverage vending machines to be tested with ``normal 
lighting and control settings.'' The revised ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 includes the same requirement.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE recognized that this 
requirement could be interpreted differently in various circumstances 
and, as such, proposed to amend the regulatory text to clarify the 
treatment of internal lighting when conducting the DOE test procedure. 
Specifically, DOE proposed an amendment to the regulatory text stating 
that lighting that is contained within, or is part of the physical 
boundary of, the beverage vending machine established by the top, 
bottom, and side panels of the equipment be placed in its maximum 
energy consuming state, as DOE believes that the maximum energy 
consuming state is consistent with the ``normal'' setting and is the 
operation most commonly employed in the field. 79 FR at 46921.
    In response to DOE's proposal in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, 
AMS, SVA, Coca-Cola, and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 supported DOE's proposal to 
specify that internal lighting operation must be operated in the 
maximum energy-consuming state during testing. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 6; 
SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, 
No. 0011 at p. 3) SVA and AMS supported DOE's proposal to include such 
clarifications in both Appendices A and B, and noted that they both 
currently test equipment with the interior lighting in the maximum 
energy consuming state. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 6; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) 
SVA further noted that software modes that shut off the lighting system 
when not in use were probably unlawful if used to influence the outcome 
of the energy consumption test. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) Coca-Cola added 
that many of their machines employ energy management routines that have 
an impact on the lighting of the machine. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6) 
However, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and Coca-Cola cautioned that machines may have 
been tested differently in the past, and the new test procedure could 
significantly change energy consumption values previously reported. 
(ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6)
    DOE appreciates comments from AMS, SVA, Coca-Cola, and ASHRAE SPC 
32.1 supporting DOE's proposal. Receiving no negative comments, in this 
final rule, DOE is clarifying that interior lighting that is contained 
within, or is part of the physical boundary of the beverage vending 
machine established by the top, bottom, and side panels of the 
equipment, shall be placed in its maximum energy consuming state for 
testing.
    In response to the comments submitted by Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 
32.1 noting that previous tests may have been conducted using methods 
not consistent with the provisions DOE is adopting in this final rule, 
DOE reiterates that because the DOE test procedure was previously 
silent or ambiguous on the specific treatment of some components, it is 
possible that some BVM manufacturers misinterpreted DOE's test 
procedure and, thus, some BVM models were tested inconsistently. DOE 
acknowledges that some BVM models may require recertification based on 
these new clarifications. However, DOE continues to maintain that the 
clarified treatment of interior lighting serves only to unambiguously 
clarify the intent of the DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE is adding 
this clarifying language to section 2.2.3.2 of Appendix A and section 
2.2.5.2 of Appendix B for certifying equipment in accordance with 
existing and any amended energy conservation standards, respectively.
c. External Customer Display Signs, Lights, or Digital Screens
    In addition to interior lighting, discussed in section III.A.11.b, 
DOE recognizes that some beverage vending machines may incorporate 
additional external customer display signs, lights, and/or digital 
screens outside of the body of the refrigerated BVM cabinet. In this 
case, such external customer display signs, lights, and/or digital 
screens are optional and are not integral to the cabinet, but external 
customer display signs, lights, may significantly increase the energy 
use of beverage vending machines that include those features. However, 
such external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens are 
not explicitly addressed in the DOE test procedure, as adopted in the 
2006 BVM test procedure final rule, or in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2004 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010. In the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify that customer display signs, lighting, 
and digital screens external to the beverage vending machine and not 
integral to the operation of the primary refrigeration or vending 
functions (e.g., digital screens that are not necessary for consumers 
to make a product selection) may be disabled, disconnected, or 
otherwise de-energized. 79 FR at 46920-46921. However, in the case that 
the customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens are integral 
to the functionality of the beverage vending machine, in that it cannot 
perform the primary refrigeration and vending functions if such 
equipment is disabled or removed, DOE clarified that the integral 
customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens should be put in 
the lowest energy-consuming state that maintains primary functionality 
of the beverage vending machine. For example, if a digital screen 
performs the vending or money processing function, that screen would be 
placed in its lowest energy-consuming state that still allows the money 
processing feature to function; this would provide equitable treatment 
with other payment mechanisms that must be energized, as specified in 
section III.A.11.a. Id.
    DOE proposed to include this clarification in Appendix A, to be 
used when certifying equipment under existing standards, based on the 
fact that such external customer display signs, lights, or digital 
screens are not mentioned in the existing DOE test procedure, as 
adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, and are peripheral 
to the primary functionality of a beverage vending machine, as 
discussed in section III.A.11. DOE also noted that such treatment is 
consistent with interpretation to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, which 
states that ``the Standard (32.1) addresses the refrigerated/delivery 
system portion of the machine. Thus, any peripheral devices, not 
necessary for the basic function of the vending machine are not 
addressed by Standard 32.1.'' Id.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed similar treatment 
for Appendix B, but also proposed to define a new term, ``standby 
mode'' to more unambiguously specify the state in which external 
customer display signs, lights, and digital screens would be placed if 
they cannot be de-energized without affecting the primary functionality 
of the beverage vending machine under test. DOE proposed to

[[Page 45779]]

define standby mode as the mode of operation in which any external, 
integral customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens are 
connected to main power, do not produce the intended illumination, 
display, or interaction functionality, and can be switched into another 
mode automatically with only a remote user-generated or an internal 
signal. DOE proposed to clarify that, in Appendix B, that if the 
external, integral customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens 
do not have a standby mode, the integral customer display signs, 
lighting, or digital screens would be placed in the lowest energy-
consuming state, and, if a digital screen performs the vending or money 
processing function, that screen should be placed in its lowest energy-
consuming state that still allows the money processing feature to 
function, similar to Appendix A. Id.
    In response to DOE's proposed treatment of external customer 
display signs, lights, or digital screens in the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR, AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola supported DOE's proposal to de-
energize accessories non-essential to the vending process and 
unnecessary to the machine's basic operation, and agreed that such 
systems should be on if required for product selection or vending. The 
commenters supported such a proposal for both Appendices A and B. (AMS, 
No. 0007 at pp. 6-7; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 
7) NEEA commented that capturing the standby energy usage of integral 
signage might drive manufacturers to move to external signage and 
discourage integral smart controls to reduce energy usage of integral 
signage. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 2)
    DOE appreciates comments from AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola supporting 
DOE's proposed treatment of external customer display signs, lighting, 
and digital screens. DOE acknowledges NEEA's comment regarding the 
potential for manufacturers to move to external signage to avoid 
accounting for the standby energy usage of internal signage, but 
believes that there is a limited capacity for them to do so, since any 
interior lighting used to illuminate product or equipment side panels 
will inherently be integral to the unit and, thus, must be operated in 
the maximum energy consumption state, as specified in earlier in this 
section. The one example where interior lighting that must be energized 
under the DOE test procedure might have opportunity to be replaced by 
an external display screen that does not have to be energized under the 
DOE test procedure may be on beverage vending machines that currently 
incorporate illuminated side panels to serve a marketing and 
advertising function. The illuminated side panels could, theoretically, 
be replaced by external digital screens. However, DOE notes that, based 
on DOE's review of existing Class B equipment, the illuminated side 
panels currently available on the market are typically quite large, 
covering the entire side of the beverage vending machine, and any 
replacement illuminated sign or digital screen would likely be 
equivalently large. DOE believes that such large display screens or 
individually manufactured external illuminated signage would be 
significantly more expensive than the current equipment design with 
interior lighting and, as such, DOE believes the likelihood that 
manufacturers will migrate to external signage solely to decrease the 
measured energy consumption of their equipment is very low.
    Regarding the proposed definition of ``standby mode'' in Appendix 
B, AMS supported DOE's proposed definition, but stated that the list of 
accessories should be expanded from external, integral display signs, 
lighting, or digital screens to all accessories that might be applied 
to beverage vending machines. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 6-7) NRCan 
suggested renaming the standby mode to ``external accessory standby 
mode'' for clarity. (NRCan, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 
116) Coca-Cola suggested an alternative definition. (Coca-Cola, No. 
0010 at p. 8) Specifically, Coca-Cola suggested the following 
definition for standby mode for beverage vending machines: ``Standby 
mode is the state that the vending machine is in when it does not have 
to deliver product, is not intended to deliver product, or cannot be 
used to select and purchase a product. In this mode of operation any 
powered element can be in a different state than when the machine is in 
normal operation delivering product to a consumer. Standby mode can be 
activated automatically by programming or by sensory devices monitoring 
internal functions or external conditions and activity.'' (Coca-Cola, 
No. 0010 at p. 8)
    DOE appreciates the comment from AMS supporting the definition of 
the standby mode for external customer display signs, lights, or 
digital screens. In response to expanding the applicability of the 
standby mode definition, to DOE's knowledge there are not any other 
accessories that the definition would impact in a way that is not 
already accounted for in the test procedure as adopted in this final 
rule. DOE considered the modifications in the comments from NRCan and 
Coca-Cola regarding the name and definition of standby mode as it 
applies to external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens. 
DOE agrees with NRCan's proposal to rename the definition of standby 
mode to be more specific to the accessories to which it is applied, and 
is incorporating such a change in this final rule. In response to Coca-
Cola's suggested changes to the definition of standby mode, DOE 
believes the changes in fact alter the applicability and intent of the 
definition. Coca-Cola's suggested changes appear to apply to the 
beverage vending machine as a whole, rather than just the external 
customer display signs, lights, or digital screens. Consistent with 
NRCan's suggestion, DOE's standby mode definition is applicable to 
external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens and, as 
such, DOE believes that Coca-Cola's proposed edits are not applicable 
in this case.
    Additionally, in light of consideration of the stakeholder comments 
after publication of the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE reviewed 
many styles of external customer display signs, lights, and digital 
screens and determined that the previously-proposed clarifications for 
Appendices A and B are materially the same. Specifically, both 
appendices clarify that customer display signs, lighting, and digital 
screens must be:
    (1) Disabled, disconnected, or otherwise de-energized, if possible 
and if doing so does not interfere with the primary functionality of 
the beverage vending machine, or
    (2) placed in its lowest energy consuming state or standby mode (in 
Appendix B) if the equipment cannot be de-energized, or
    (3) placed in the lowest energy consuming state that maintains 
primary functionality of the beverage vending machine. As Table III.3 
illustrates, the only difference between the proposed Appendices A and 
B methodologies is the incorporation of ``standby mode'' as the 
preferred operational state if the equipment cannot be de-energized or 
disconnected.

[[Page 45780]]



 Table III.3--Summary of Proposed Operational State for External Display
  Signs, Lights, or Digital Screens in Appendix A and Appendix B in the
                            2014 BVM TP NOPR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  External customer display                Operational state
  sign, lights, or digital   -------------------------------------------
   screen characteristics          Appendix A            Appendix B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can be de-energized and do    Disabled,             Disabled,
 not participate in primary    disconnected, or      disconnected, or
 functionality of the          otherwise de-         otherwise de-
 beverage vending machine.     energized.            energized.
Cannot be de-energized......  Place in lowest       Placed in ``standby
                               energy consuming      mode,'' if
                               state.                available, or
                                                     lowest energy
                                                     consuming state.
Necessary for primary         Placed in lowest      Placed in lowest
 functionality of beverage     energy consuming      energy consuming
 vending machine.              state that            state that
                               maintains primary     maintains primary
                               functionality of      functionality of
                               the beverage          the beverage
                               vending machine.      vending machine.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This difference between the proposed language for the two 
appendices would only result in a material difference in the test 
procedure if there is a difference between ``standby mode'' and the 
``lowest energy consuming state'' for external customer display signs, 
lights, or digital screens that cannot be de-energized. However, for 
external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens DOE 
reviewed, the ``standby mode'' defined in Appendix B is the same as the 
``lowest energy consuming state'' for equipment that cannot be de-
energized and does not participate in the vending function of the 
beverage vending machine. Therefore, for the sake of clarity and 
consistency, in this final rule, DOE is aligning the treatment of 
external customer display signs, lights, and digital screens in 
Appendices A and B. In these final rule amendments, the definition of 
external accessory standby mode and the proposed treatment in Appendix 
B will be applicable to both appendices. Specifically, DOE is 
establishing provisions in section 2.2.3.3 of Appendix A and section 
2.2.5.3 of Appendix B to clarify that all external display signs, 
lights, and digital screens should be de-energized or, if they cannot 
be de-energized without impacting the primary functionality of the 
equipment, placed in the external accessory standby mode (if available) 
or the lowest energy consuming state (if no external accessory standby 
mode is available) that maintains such functionality. DOE also is 
establishing a definition of external accessory standby mode. DOE 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR to define ``standby mode'' 
as the mode of operation in which the external, integral customer 
display signs, lighting, or digital screens are connected to the main 
power; do not produce the intended illumination, display, or 
interaction functionality; and can be switched into another mode 
automatically with only a remote user-generated or an internal signal. 
DOE is now incorporating this definition into section 1.2 of both 
Appendices A and B as the definition for ``external accessory standby 
mode.'' As discussed previously, DOE believes that keeping the language 
consistent across the two appendices will ensure continuity and 
minimize unnecessary confusion.
d. Anti-Sweat and Other Electric Resistance Heaters
    Some beverage vending machines may come equipped with anti-sweat 
electric resistance heaters that serve to evaporate any water that 
condenses on the surface of the door or walls during operation.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the test 
procedure to clarify that anti-sweat and other electric resistance 
heaters should be operational during testing under the DOE test 
procedure. DOE also proposed to clarify that models with a user-
selectable setting must be turned on and set to the maximum usage 
position, and that models featuring an automatic, non-user-adjustable 
controller that turns on or off based on environmental conditions must 
be operating in the automatic state. Additionally, DOE proposed to 
amend the regulatory text to clarify that, if a unit is not shipped 
with a controller from the point of manufacture, but is intended to be 
used with a controller, the manufacturer must make representations of 
the basic model based upon the rated performance of that basic model as 
tested when equipped with an appropriate controller. 79 FR at 46921.
    DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendments 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding anti-sweat and 
other electric resistance heaters. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE 
is incorporating the clarifying provisions into section 2.2.3.4 of 
Appendix A and 2.2.5.4 of Appendix B regarding the treatment of anti-
sweat and other electric resistance heaters as proposed in the 2014 BVM 
test procedure NOPR.
e. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps
    Beverage vending machines capture water from the air entering the 
cabinet during operation by causing the water to condense and then 
freeze on the evaporator coil of the equipment. During a defrost cycle, 
this frost is melted, and the meltwater produced must be removed from 
the unit. In many types of equipment, this meltwater is collected in a 
pan beneath the unit. Some models of beverage vending machines come 
equipped with electric resistance heaters that evaporate this water out 
of the pan and into the ambient air. Other models may come equipped 
with pumps that pump meltwater to an external drain.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to add clarifying 
language to the DOE test procedure in Appendices A and B requiring that 
these electric resistance heaters and condensate pumps be installed and 
operational during testing pursuant to the DOE test procedure as they 
would be used in the field during the entire test. DOE proposed to 
clarify that prior to the start of the24 hour period used to determine 
temperature stabilization prior to the start of the test period 
(hereafter referred to as ``stabilization period''), the condensate pan 
should be dry and that, during the entirety of the period of the test 
following the start of the stabilization period, any condensate 
moisture generated should be allowed to accumulate in the pan as it 
would during normal operation. DOE proposed to require that, if the 
condensate heater or pump was equipped with controls to initiate the 
operation of the heater or pump based on water level or ambient 
conditions, these controls be enabled and the heater or pump be 
operated in the automatic setting, but that water should not be 
manually added to or removed from the condensate pan at any time during 
the entire test. 79 FR at 46921-46922. Because manufacturers may offer 
condensate pan heaters and pumps that are shipped separately from

[[Page 45781]]

the specific beverage vending machine unit with which they would be 
used in normal operation, DOE also proposed to clarify that any 
beverage vending machines distributed in commerce with an available 
condensate pan heater or pump must be tested with the feature in place. 
Id.
    DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendment 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding condensate pan 
heaters and pumps. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the 
clarifications proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR with no 
modifications as sections 2.2.3.5 and 2.2.5.5 of Appendix A and 
Appendix B, respectively.
f. Illuminated Temperature Displays
    Manufacturers may equip some beverage vending machine models with 
illuminated displays that provide visual information to the equipment 
operator regarding, for example, the temperature of the refrigerated 
volume of the unit. DOE understands this feature to be integral to the 
design of the given model and, as such, in the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR, proposed to amend the test procedure to clarify that any 
illuminated temperature displays should be enabled during testing as 
they would be during normal field operation. 79 FR at 46922.
    DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendment 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding illuminated 
temperature displays. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting 
clarifying language in section 2.2.3.6 of Appendix A and section 
2.2.5.6 of Appendix B to specify that illuminated temperature displays 
must be enabled during the test as they would be during normal field 
operation, consistent with what was proposed in the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR.
g. Condenser Filters
    Manufacturers may offer models equipped with nonpermanent filters 
over a model's condenser coil to prevent particulates from blocking the 
condenser coil and reducing airflow. In the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR, DOE proposed adding clarifying language requiring that these 
filters be removed during testing pursuant to the DOE test procedure, 
as such accessories are optional and are not required for operation of 
the beverage vending machine. 79 FR at 46922.
    In response to DOE's proposed treatment of condenser filters in the 
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, CMS commented that if a beverage vending 
machine is equipped with a condenser filter, it should be tested with 
one installed, as it can increase the energy consumption of the unit. 
(CMS, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 100) DOE did not 
receive any additional comments on this topic.
    DOE acknowledges CMS's comment regarding condenser filters, but 
while condenser filters may impact long-term energy consumption of 
beverage vending machines in the field, these optional condenser 
filters are not expected to significantly impact energy use over the 
relatively short duration of the DOE test procedure. DOE further notes 
that many options of condenser filter styles or manufacturers may be 
available, complicating and adding burden to the DOE test procedure. As 
condenser filters are more important for the long-term reliability of 
the equipment in the field than the tested energy consumption, DOE does 
not believe the additional burden associated with requiring the testing 
and certification of a number of different BVM models based on small 
variations in condenser filter manufacturers or styles is justified. 
Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the clarifying language 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR and requiring that any 
optional condenser filters be removed during testing into sections 
2.2.3.7 of Appendix A and 2.2.5.7 of Appendix B.
h. Security Covers
    Manufacturers may offer for sale, with a basic model, optional 
straps or other devices to secure the beverage vending machine and 
prevent theft or tampering. Because such security devices are not 
anticipated to affect the measured energy consumption of refrigerated 
beverage vending machines and will likely significantly complicate the 
loading and testing of BVM models, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, 
DOE proposed to clarify that these security devices should be removed 
during testing under the DOE test procedure. 79 FR at 46922.
    DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendments 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding security covers. 
Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the proposed clarifying 
language in Appendices A and B with no modification into sections 
2.2.3.8 and 2.2.5.8 of Appendix A and B, respectively.
i. Coated Coils
    Coated coils, generally specified for use in units that will be 
subjected to environments in which acids or oxidizers are present, are 
treated with an additional coating (such as a layer of epoxy or 
polymer) as a barrier to protect the bare metal of the coil from 
deterioration and corrosion. DOE believes the existing DOE test 
procedure accurately accounts for the performance of all types of 
coils, including those with coatings, and that no additional 
clarifications are needed in the test procedure.
    DOE did not receive any comments in response to the discussion in 
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding coated coils. Therefore, in 
this final rule, DOE is not adding any clarifying language to the test 
procedure regarding the treatment of coated coils.
j. General Purpose Outlets
    Some beverage vending machines may be offered for sale with 
integrated general purpose electrical outlets, which may be used to 
power additional equipment. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE 
proposed adding clarifying language to Appendices A and BB specifying 
that no external load should be connected to the general purpose 
outlets contained on a unit during testing. 79 FR at 46922.
    DOE received one comment during the NOPR public meeting regarding 
the treatment of general purpose outlets on beverage vending machines. 
NEEA suggested fully energizing the electrical outlet to the full 
amount that the circuit is able to handle instead of de-energizing them 
to the lowest energy consumption since they are regulated by National 
Electric Code. (NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 96) In 
response to the comment from NEEA, DOE notes that energizing the 
general purpose outlet to the maximum energy consumption may give an 
estimation of the maximum energy consumption of the beverage vending 
machine, but fully energizing the general purpose outlet is not 
necessarily representative of the energy consumption of any such 
beverage vending machine in the field. Due to the lack of information 
regarding the extent to which general purpose outlets on beverage 
vending machines are used in the field and their representative 
incremental energy consumption on beverage vending machines equipped 
with such devices, DOE is unable to determine a representative test 
procedure or load profile for general purpose outlets. Therefore, DOE 
is clarifying in sections 2.2.3.9 of Appendix A and 2.2.5.9 of Appendix 
B that no external load should be connected to the general purpose 
outlets contained on a unit in this final rule, as proposed in the 2014 
BVM test procedure NOPR.

[[Page 45782]]

k. Crankcase Heaters and Electric Resistance Heaters for Cold Weather
    Some BVM models feature crankcase heaters or electric resistance 
heaters designed to keep the compressor warm in order to maintain the 
refrigerant at optimal conditions or to prevent freezing of beverages 
contained in the unit when the unit is operating at extremely low 
ambient temperatures. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed 
to clarify that, if present, crankcase heaters and other electric 
resistance heaters for cold weather should be operational during the 
test. DOE also proposed that, if a control system, such as a thermostat 
or electronic controller, is used to modulate the operation of the 
heater, it should be used as intended per the manufacturer's 
instructions. 79 FR at 46922.
    DOE did not receive any comments in response to the proposed 
clarification that crankcase heaters and electric resistance heaters 
for cold weather, if present, should be operational during the test 
and, if controlled, should be controlled in accordance with the 
manufacturer's instructions. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is 
adopting the clarifying provisions as sections 2.2.3.10 and 2.2.5.10 of 
Appendix A and B, respectively, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR.

B. Appendix B: Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions to Account for 
Low Power Modes

    In this final rule, DOE is also updating the DOE test procedure for 
beverage vending machines, to include in a new Appendix B to 10 CFR 
part 431, subpart Q, which is to be used to demonstrate compliance with 
any new or amended standards established as a result of the associated 
ongoing energy conservation standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-
2013-BT-STD-0022) This new Appendix B includes all of the amendments in 
Appendix A and, in addition, provisions for testing low power modes.
    Many beverage vending machines are equipped with low power modes 
designed to be used during periods when demand for refrigerated 
beverages is low and there is opportunity to reduce equipment energy 
use without greatly affecting consumer utility. The features of these 
modes may include (but are not limited to) dimming or switching off 
lights, and raising the temperature set point (to which the unit cools 
the product) to a value higher than the temperature set point 
associated with the unit's vending mode.
    BVM low power modes are typically activated during periods when 
customer traffic is known or anticipated to be minimal or nonexistent 
(such as at night or when a facility is closed), though they may also 
be activated based on short-term historical vend patterns or after a 
specified length of inactivity. Some low power modes may operate on 
fixed schedules, while others may operate based on sensor input such as 
that from a motion sensor or customer interface on the machine. 
Individual machines may have multiple low power modes, such as a 
schedule-based low power mode allowing the refrigeration system to shut 
off during periods when customers are not available and an activity-
based low power mode during vending periods that dims the lights when 
customer activity is not detected after a certain length of time.
    ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the test method incorporated by 
reference in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, and ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2010, the test method DOE is incorporating by reference 
in this final rule, both require that the vending machine be ``operated 
with normal lighting and control settings, using only those energy 
management controls that are permanently operational and not capable of 
being adjusted by a machine operator.'' (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 
7.1.1(d)) These test methods do not capture the widely available user-
adjustable low power modes of operation in a representative manner, and 
manufacturers that offer this functionality are not able to reflect the 
increased efficiency of their units under either of these test methods. 
Additionally, these test methods do not specify how to test equipment 
that has permanently operational controls (meaning those that cannot be 
disabled).)
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed amendments to the 
BVM test procedure to provide clear and consistent provisions for 
testing beverage vending machines equipped with low power modes as well 
as to indicate what settings would be required to be used for the 
testing of machines with energy management controls that are 
permanently operational (meaning those that cannot be disabled), but 
can be adjusted by the operator. 79 FR 46908, 46923-46927 (Aug. 11, 
2014). DOE received comments on those proposals in the 2014 NOPR public 
meeting and during the written comment period following publication of 
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR in the Federal Register. Id.
    This section summarizes DOE's specific proposals regarding the 
treatment of low power modes in the BVM test procedure, any comments 
received regarding those proposals, DOE's response to comments 
received, and the revisions to the test procedure related to low power 
modes that are included in sections 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2 of 
Appendix B. Specifically, sections III.B.1, III.B.2, and III.B.3 
discuss definitions related to the low power mode test procedure, DOE's 
adopted test method for accounting for low power modes of operation, 
and the refrigeration low power mode verification test, respectively.
1. Definitions Related to the Low Power Mode Test Procedure
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to allow 
manufacturers of equipment with a low power mode to enable features 
associated with that mode during a fixed period of time during the BVM 
test procedure. DOE defined ``low power mode'' as a state in which a 
BVM's lighting, refrigeration, and/or other energy-using systems are 
automatically adjusted (without user intervention) such that they 
consume less energy than they consume in an active vending environment 
when the beverage vending machine is capable of dispensing sealed 
beverages at the intended vending temperature (typically 36 [deg]F 
 1 [deg]F). 79 FR at 46924.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also noted that it might 
be beneficial to differentiate between low power modes that affect the 
refrigeration system and allow the cabinet temperature to increase 
during a specified period and those that affect other energy-consuming 
accessories, such as lighting, display signage, or vending equipment. 
As such, DOE proposed to separately define ``refrigeration low power 
mode'' and ``accessory low power mode.'' DOE proposed to define 
refrigeration system low power mode as a state in which a beverage 
vending machine's refrigeration system is in low power mode and the 
average next-to-vend temperature is automatically (without user 
intervention) increased to 40 [deg]F or higher for at least 1 hour. DOE 
proposed to define ``accessory low power mode'' as a state in which a 
beverage vending machine's lighting and/or other non-refrigeration 
energy using systems are in low power mode, which may include, but is 
not limited to, dimming or turning off lights or display signage, but 
which does not include adjustment of the refrigeration system. Id.

[[Page 45783]]

    NEEA and SVA supported DOE's proposed definition of low power mode. 
(NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 147-148; SVA, No. 
0008 at p. 3) Regarding DOE's proposed definition of ``refrigeration 
low power mode,'' SVA noted that refrigeration low power modes can 
vary, and therefore need to be broadly included in DOE's definition, 
specifically objecting to the clause ``without user intervention,'' if 
such was intended to include the initial programming of software 
parameters that allow the refrigeration low power mode to be enabled. 
SVA offered that various methods can be used to achieve the same 
outcome of reduced energy consumption resulting from variations in 
refrigeration system operation (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Coca-Cola 
commented that the refrigeration low power mode should not be 
micromanaged and that refrigeration low power modes could include 
cycling the evaporator fan or temporarily defeating the defrost cycles. 
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 9)
    In response to DOE's request for comment on the proposed definition 
of ``standby,'' (see section III.A.11.c), Coca-Cola commented that DOE 
should consider an alternative definition that DOE believes is 
applicable to DOE's proposed definition of low power mode. (Coca-Cola, 
No. 0010 at p. 8) Specifically, Coca-Cola suggested the following 
definition for standby mode for beverage vending machines: ``Standby 
mode is the state that the vending machine is in when it does not have 
to deliver product, is not intended to deliver product, or cannot be 
used to select and purchase a product. In this mode of operation any 
powered element can be in a different state than when the machine is in 
normal operation delivering product to a consumer. Standby mode can be 
activated automatically by programming or by sensory devices monitoring 
internal functions or external conditions and activity.'' (Coca-Cola, 
No. 0010 at p. 8) While DOE's standby mode definition is only 
applicable to external customer display signs, lights, and digital 
screens, DOE believes Coca-Cola's comments are also pertinent to how 
DOE defines low power mode for beverage vending machines. As such, DOE 
also considered these comments with respect to the ``low power mode'' 
definition proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
    DOE appreciates the interested parties' support regarding the 
inclusion of definitions of ``low power mode,'' ``accessory low power 
mode,'' and ``refrigeration low power mode'' in the test procedure. In 
response to Coca-Cola and SVA's comments regarding the definition of 
``refrigeration low power mode,'' DOE acknowledges that theoretically, 
there are many mechanisms and control approaches to adjusting the 
refrigeration system to achieve energy savings during extended periods 
of inactivity. However, DOE must balance the desire for flexibility in 
the ``refrigeration low power mode'' definition with the need to have 
any such ``refrigeration low power mode'' be verifiable. As such, DOE 
has designed the ``refrigeration low power mode'' definition to, as 
much as possible, be focused on what a ``refrigeration low power mode'' 
is intended to achieve, namely, energy savings resulting from the 
elevation of the refrigerated cabinet temperature when the beverage 
vending machine is not in an active vending environment. Therefore, the 
``refrigeration low power mode'' definition is intended to be broadly 
applicable to any type of control that achieves the desired effect. 
However, DOE must be able to quantifiably confirm the presence of any 
refrigeration low power mode to prevent manufacturers from being able 
to claim the energy savings associated with the existence of a 
refrigeration low power mode when the beverage vending machine does 
not, in fact, include such a feature. Thus, DOE defined the 
refrigeration low power mode to reference a quantifiable temperature 
threshold and time interval, to ensure that the existence of a 
refrigeration low power mode could be quantifiably determined through a 
test. See section III.B.3 for a more in-depth discussion of DOE's 
specific refrigeration low power mode verification test method. As 
mentioned above, DOE acknowledges that there may be some types of 
refrigeration low power mode controls that are not effectively captured 
by DOE's proposed refrigeration low power mode verification test and, 
in such a case, the manufacturer of such equipment should submit a 
petition for a test procedure waiver in accordance with the provisions 
in 10 CFR 431.401.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ DOE issued a final rule amending its regulations governing 
petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for 
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. 79 FR 
26591 (May 9, 2014). This final rule became effective on June 9, 
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to Coca-Cola's comment regarding cycling the evaporator 
fan or temporarily defeating the defrost cycles as a type of 
refrigeration low power mode, DOE notes that such controls are only low 
power modes to the extent that they are activated when the beverage 
vending machine is not intended to be actively vending, which is 
consistent with DOE's definition of low power mode. If a beverage 
vending machine contains controls on the evaporator fan or other 
systems that do not meet the definition of low power mode and are not 
adjustable by the machine operator, such controls can be employed for 
the duration of the test procedure, provided their operation maintains 
the primary functionality of the beverage vending machine and is not 
inconsistent with the specifications of section III.A.11. If such 
controls do meet the definition of a low power mode, they would be 
treated as an accessory low power mode, and could be enabled and tested 
during the low power mode period. Although evaporator and condenser fan 
motor controls and defrost controls do affect the refrigeration system, 
they are not treated as refrigeration system low power modes unless 
they adjust cabinet temperature. To clarify this, DOE is modifying the 
definition of refrigeration low power mode to more specifically explain 
that a refrigeration low power mode is any state in which a beverage 
vending machine's refrigeration system is in low power mode by raising 
the cabinet temperature. Additionally, DOE is modifying the definition 
of accessory low power mode to clarify that any control system that 
meets the definition of a low power mode and is not a refrigeration low 
power mode qualifies as an accessory low power mode.
    In response to Coca-Cola's comments regarding the definition of 
``standby mode,'' which DOE determined were potentially also applicable 
to DOE's definition of ``low power mode,'' DOE believes that Coca-
Cola's suggestions are consistent with DOE's definition of ``low power 
mode'' for beverage vending machines. Specifically, DOE believes that 
Coca-Cola's suggested language--``any powered element can be in a 
different state than when the machine is in normal operation delivering 
product to a consumer''--is consistent with DOE's definition, which 
specifies that, in low power mode, a beverage vending machine's 
lighting, refrigeration, and/or other energy-using systems are 
automatically adjusted (without user intervention) such that they 
consume less energy than they consume in an active vending environment. 
Coca-Cola's more specific language regarding how such modes may be 
activated provides useful examples of control methods, all of which are 
recognized under DOE's ``low power mode'' definition. However, DOE 
believes that the proposed definition is more flexible and more broadly 
applicable, since it does not prescribe specific control methods or 
specific features that must

[[Page 45784]]

be disabled. As Coca-Cola's suggestions are not substantively different 
than DOE's proposed definition for ``low power mode,'' DOE is adopting 
the proposed definition without modification.
    DOE also notes that ``low power mode'' as defined in this final 
rule is different from EPCA's definition of ``standby mode.'' Regarding 
the applicability of ``standby mode'' to beverage vending machines in 
general, DOE reviewed the operating modes available for beverage 
vending machines and determined that this equipment does not have 
operating modes that meet the definition of standby mode or off mode, 
as established at 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3). Specifically, beverage vending 
machines are typically providing at least one main function--
refrigeration. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)) DOE recognizes that in a 
unique equipment design, the low power mode includes disabling the 
refrigeration system, while for other equipment the low power mode 
controls only elevate the thermostat set point. Because low power modes 
still include some amount of refrigeration for the vast majority of 
equipment, DOE believes that such a mode does not constitute a 
``standby mode,'' as defined by EPCA, for beverage vending machines.
2. Low Power Mode Test Method
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to establish a 
physical test that consists of a 6-hour low power mode test period that 
allows accessory low power modes to be enabled, and a separate 
calculation approach to account for refrigeration low power modes. DOE 
proposed a calculation-based approach to account for refrigeration low 
power modes because DOE believed it was the best method to provide 
consistent and equitable treatment among BMV models, and to ensure the 
accuracy and repeatability of the test method, without making the test 
method unduly burdensome to conduct. 79 FR at 46924-46926.
    Under DOE's proposed method, equipment with a low power mode would 
stabilize and operate under normal test procedure conditions, with all 
equipment and accessories energized as they would be when the equipment 
is capable of actively refrigerating and vending sealed beverages (as 
specified in section III.A.11), for the first 18 hours of the test 
period. During this ``active vending'' test period, DOE proposed that 
any low power modes be disabled and, unless specified otherwise by 
another portion of the test procedure, that all low power mode control 
features that cannot be disabled but can be adjusted would be required 
to be adjusted such that the DEC is maximized, to best represent the 
likely performance of the equipment in the field while in active 
vending mode. Similarly, DOE proposed adopting a modification to ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1, requiring that any party performing the test 
procedure provide, if necessary, any physical stimuli or other input to 
the machine that may be needed to prevent automatic activation of low 
power modes during the vending state test period. Id.
    Then, for equipment with an accessory low power mode, DOE proposed 
that the accessory low power mode may be enabled for the final 6 hours 
of the test, or from hour 18 to hour 24 of the 24-hour test. 79 FR at 
46926. For equipment with multiple accessory low power modes or 
multiple energy use states, DOE clarified that equipment should be 
configured with the lowest energy-consuming lighting and control 
settings during the accessory low power mode test period. 79 FR at 
46927. Equipment without an accessory low power mode would continue to 
operate normally and in accordance with specifications in the DOE test 
procedure. DOE proposed 6 -hours as a representative length of time for 
the low power mode test period, based on the fact that it is intended 
to represent off hours between periods of vending when the facility may 
be closed or have low occupancy. While DOE recognizes that there is a 
wide range of types of low power mode controls and time periods for 
which these controls are enabled, DOE believes a timeframe of 6 hours 
is a reasonable representation of average field use. 79 FR at 46926.
    To account for the energy savings associated with the presence of 
any refrigeration low power modes, DOE proposed using a calculation-
based energy credit equal to 3 percent of the measured DEC of any unit 
equipped with a refrigeration low power mode. Id. DOE developed the 3 
percent value based upon test data evaluating the low power mode energy 
savings for a variety of different BVM models available on the market. 
DOE developed the credit to represent the approximate energy savings 
that would have been achieved through a 6-hour time period during which 
the refrigeration low power mode of the tested unit was enabled, 
including any time and energy consumption necessary to return the case 
to appropriate vending temperature within the 6-hour period. The method 
DOE used to develop this value is described in detail in the BVM test 
procedure NOPR. 79 FR at 46925-46926.
    In response to DOE's proposed low power mode test provisions, DOE 
received a number of comments from interested parties. AMS supported 
DOE's proposed low power mode test method, but noted that 
characteristics of the low power mode were account driven and depended 
on what customers wanted. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 7-8) Coca-Cola agreed 
with AMS that the low power mode is dependent on many factors and is 
primarily account-driven and they noted that a test-procedure should 
not define or limit how energy savings are achieved. (Coca-Cola, No. 
0010 at p. 9) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and SVA supported DOE's view regarding 
the responsibility of the testing entity to provide the necessary 
stimuli to prevent automatic activation of low power modes during the 
vending state test procedure. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4; SVA, 
No. 0008 at p. 3) However, SVA stated that the inclusion of low power 
modes in the test procedure would be overly burdensome to manufacturers 
and would make it difficult to compare results. SVA added that these 
features are present on most, if not all, beverage vending machines and 
SVA did not support giving manufacturers an option to reduce the 
publicized DEC value without actually changing anything of substance. 
(SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3)
    Regarding DOE's proposed calculation-based method to account for 
refrigeration low power modes, NEEA and SVA supported DOE's proposal to 
provide a percentage credit to machines with a refrigeration low power 
mode. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p.2; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Conversely, ASHRAE 
SPC 32.1, Coca-Cola, California IOUs, and AMS commented that a physical 
test would be the most accurate method to account for low power mode 
operation and expressed concern about the 3 percent savings credit for 
refrigeration data low power mode. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4; 
Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 10; CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 2; AMS, No. 0007 
at pp. 7-8) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that the committee is currently 
working to specify a physical refrigeration low power mode test 
protocol that would be applicable to all BVM operating schemes. (ASHRAE 
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4) Coca-Cola submitted that it was acceptable 
to separate low power mode for refrigeration systems from low power 
mode for other machine functions, since the former is tied to food 
safety. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 9)
    Regarding the length of the low power mode test period, Coca-Cola 
supported

[[Page 45785]]

DOE's proposal of a 6-hour low power mode test period. (Coca-Cola, No. 
0010 at p. 9) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 noted that the committee was considering 
alternative time periods for the low power mode test period, and was in 
the process of researching available field data to determine what would 
be most appropriate and representative. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at 
p. 4)
    DOE appreciates comments from interested parties expressing support 
for DOE's low power mode test method. DOE agrees with interested 
parties that there are a wide variety of low power mode controls and 
approaches. DOE has attempted to define ``low power mode,'' ``accessory 
low power mode,'' ``refrigeration low power mode,'' and the associated 
test methods to be technology-neutral, to the extent possible. 
Specifically, DOE designed the definitions of ``low power mode,'' 
``accessory low power mode,'' and ``refrigeration low power mode'' to 
focus on the intended outcome of the low power mode, namely energy 
savings during periods of inactivity, rather than the specific 
mechanism by which such energy savings are accomplished, as discussed 
in section III.B.1. DOE also notes that employing a physical accessory 
low power mode test allows any control that meets DOE's definition of 
accessory low power mode to be enabled during the 6-hour low power mode 
test period, and the energy savings from any such accessory low power 
mode to be objectively determined. Because DOE did not employ a 
physical test, when defining ``refrigeration low power mode,'' DOE had 
to be more cognizant of the specific characteristics that constituted a 
refrigeration low power mode to ensure that the 3 percent credit would 
be applicable and to ensure that the presence of a low power mode was 
verifiable, as discussed further in section III.B.3.
    In response to SVA's comment regarding the additional burden 
associated with accounting for the impact of low power modes in the DOE 
test procedure, DOE believes that including a method to quantify the 
energy impact of low power modes is important to ensure that the test 
is representative of the energy consumption of the equipment, since, as 
SVA notes, low power modes are a common feature on many beverage 
vending machines. In addition, DOE considered repeatability and the 
burden of testing when developing the low power mode test method, and 
believes the proposed test method represents very little additional 
burden while providing a fair and accurate comparison of BVM 
performance. Specifically, DOE is adopting a calculation-based approach 
to account for the impact of any refrigeration low power mode because 
it is the least burdensome and most repeatable approach.
    However, as noted in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, non-
refrigeration based accessory low power modes are more straightforward 
to evaluate based on a physical test. Therefore, as a physical test 
will more accurately capture the energy impact of any accessory low 
power modes, DOE believes that a physical test is warranted in this 
case. Physical testing of accessory low power modes will also allow for 
differentiation and performance comparisons among different BVM models 
equipped with different accessory low power modes, whereas a 
calculation-based approach may not. DOE notes that the accessory low 
power mode test will not add to the length of the test, and only 
requires the interaction of test personnel to program the low power 
mode controls, which DOE believes will not significantly impact the 
burden associated with conducting the DOE test procedure. DOE 
specifically quantifies the burden associated with the low power mode 
test provisions, as well as all the test procedure amendments adopted 
in this final rule, in section IV.B.
    Regarding the repeatability of the accessory low power mode test 
method, DOE acknowledges comments from interested parties that 
accessory low power modes may employ a variety of different control 
strategies and control a variety of different components. While DOE 
believes that it is important to preserve flexibility to accommodate 
various types of accessory low power mode controls in the DOE test 
procedure, DOE understands that this could impact the repeatability of 
the test if it is not clear which control settings should be employed 
for testing. Therefore, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure 
NOPR, DOE is adopting provisions in this final rule that beverage 
vending machines with multiple accessory low power modes must be placed 
in the accessory low power mode that results in the maximum energy 
savings.
    DOE appreciates the comments from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Coca-Cola, 
California IOUs, and AMS regarding a desire for a physical test for the 
refrigeration low power mode. DOE agrees with commenters that a 
physical test would be more accurate for a specific tested BVM unit and 
would allow for better differentiation of the performance of different 
types of refrigeration low power mode controls. However, as noted in 
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE understands that refrigeration 
low power modes are extremely variable in terms of their control 
strategies and operation and, in addition, may require specific 
instructions from the manufacturer to precisely modify or adjust the 
control systems to accommodate the specific provisions of the DOE test 
procedure. 79 FR at 46924-46925. DOE believes that this would reduce 
the consistency and repeatability of such a physical test method and 
would make the method impractical to implement. Therefore, due to the 
difficulty of accounting for the wide variety of refrigeration low 
power modes in a consistent, fair, and reasonable manner, DOE is 
electing to adopt a calculation-based refrigeration low power mode 
credit, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR. The 
refrigeration low power mode credit was calculated based on the 
physical testing of several BVM units, with and without the 
refrigeration low power mode employed, and including the energy 
consumption of the refrigeration system and all lights and accessories 
available on the tested units. Based on these test data, DOE determined 
the average reduction in measured DEC resulting from use of the 
refrigeration low power mode only. DOE notes that, with regard to the 
calculation-based provisions for determining the DEC when testing is 
conducted without a payment mechanism, the refrigeration low power mode 
credit would be applied to the calculated DEC, determined as the sum of 
the tested primary energy consumption and the default payment mechanism 
energy consumption value. Whether using the testing-based or 
calculation-based provisions for determining the DEC (with or without a 
payment mechanism installed, respectively), the refrigeration low power 
mode credit is applied to the total energy consumption of the machine, 
including all accessories and refrigeration system components.
    DOE also appreciates the comments of ASHRAE SPC 32.1 regarding 
their work on developing a physical testing-based refrigeration low 
power mode test method that would be universally applicable to all 
systems. However, DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 did not provide any 
additional information regarding the specific test provisions they are 
considering. DOE also notes that DOE has been following the work of 
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and is not aware of any discussions proposing or 
finalizing a refrigeration low power mode test method at this time. 
While

[[Page 45786]]

the work of ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is ongoing, to DOE's knowledge, a 
repeatable and consistent physical refrigeration low power mode test is 
not available at this time and, as such, DOE is adopting the 
refrigeration low power mode credit proposed in the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR.
    With regard to the comments from interested parties regarding the 
3-percent credit for beverage vending machines with refrigeration low 
power mode capability, DOE acknowledges the concerns of some commenters 
that 3 percent may not accurately describe the specific energy savings 
from a unique instance of a refrigeration low power mode. However, 
DOE's estimate of 3 percent energy savings due to the operation of low 
power modes is based on the data available and known to DOE, and DOE 
notes that interested parties did not submit additional data to inform 
this estimate. DOE understands that the control strategies employed by 
various refrigeration low power modes could result in variation in the 
achieved energy savings, even assuming they are evaluated according to 
a consistent test method. However, DOE reiterates that the proposed 3-
percent credit is determined based on low power mode test results of 
BVM models with different low power modes \13\ and, as such, DOE 
believes 3-percent is representative of the common types of 
refrigeration low power modes DOE has observed in the market place. 
Therefore, DOE is maintaining the 3-percent energy savings credit 
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR for beverage vending 
machines with a refrigeration low power mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ DOE described the method for determining the 3 percent 
credit in detail in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR. 79 FR 46908, 
46925-46926 (Aug. 11, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to the length of the low power mode test period, DOE 
appreciates Coca-Cola's support of the 6-hour low power mode test 
duration. DOE also appreciates ASHRAE SPC 32.1's comment that they were 
considering alternative time periods for the low power mode test period 
and were in the process of researching available field data to 
determine what would be most appropriate and representative. However, 
DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 did not submit any additional data 
regarding BVM low power mode usage profiles or durations. Lacking any 
additional data or more specific recommendations, DOE is maintaining 
the low power mode test duration at 6 hours as proposed in the 2014 BVM 
test procedure NOPR.
    DOE believes the accessory and refrigeration low power mode test 
provisions are applicable to most forms of low power modes available in 
the marketplace. However, DOE is aware of some forms of ``learning-
based'' energy management controls that cannot be accurately or 
consistently captured by the DOE test procedure for beverage vending 
machines. Such energy management controls save energy by, over time, 
using historic sales and traffic data and embedded algorithms to 
profile and predict typical times of high and low traffic and sales 
based on the sales history of the machine. However, it is extremely 
difficult to develop a repeatable procedure to evaluate the energy 
savings from such controls over a 24-hour test in a testing laboratory. 
As such, DOE acknowledges that such energy management controls would 
not be effectively captured over the course of the DOE test procedure 
and, as such, should be disabled during the test, if possible. If such 
``learning-based'' controls also have a ``schedule-based'' or 
programmable mode, the energy management controls can be operated in 
the programmed mode in accordance with the accessory low power mode 
provisions. If the controls do not have a programmable mode and cannot 
be disabled during the test, or the energy management control 
provisions are otherwise inapplicable, the manufacturer of that 
equipment should submit a petition for request a waiver in accordance 
with the provisions in 10 CFR 431.401.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ DOE issued a final rule amending its regulations governing 
petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for 
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. 79 FR 
26591 (May 9, 2014). This final rule became effective on June 9, 
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Refrigeration Low Power Mode Verification Test Protocol
    DOE recognizes that a calculated energy credit will not account for 
differences in performance or efficacy among different types of 
refrigeration low power modes and will not objectively verify the 
performance or existence of a refrigerated low power mode. Therefore, a 
procedure to verify the existence of a refrigeration low power mode, as 
defined, is required to ensure BVM manufacturers do not apply the 3-
percent refrigeration low power mode credit to basic models that have a 
refrigeration low power mode that will not result in energy savings in 
the field.
    In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed a refrigeration 
low power mode verification test method, which included initiating the 
refrigeration low power mode after completion of the 24-hour BVM test 
period and recording the average temperature of the standard test 
packages in the next-to-vend beverage positions for the next 2 hours. 
Under DOE's proposal, over the course of this 2-hour period, the 
instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperatures (i.e., the 
spatial average of all next-to-vend beverages) would be required to 
increase above 40[emsp14][deg]F and remain above 40[emsp14][deg]F for 
at least 1 hour. DOE also proposed that the beverage vending machine 
would be required to be capable of automatically returning itself to 
its normal operating conditions, including the specified integrated 
average temperature, at the conclusion of the refrigeration low power 
mode. To limit unnecessary burden, DOE also proposed that this 
validation test would not be required to determine the DEC of BVM 
models, but would be employed by DOE for enforcement purposes to verify 
the existence of a refrigeration low power mode.
    In response to DOE's proposed refrigeration low power mode, SVA 
commented that 1 hour might not be a sufficient time span to raise the 
temperature of all the next-to-vend packages above 40[emsp14][deg]F. 
SVA reasoned that this depended on multiple factors, including 
insulation effectiveness. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Coca-Cola drew DOE's 
attention to the FDA Food Code, which recommends that in a refrigerated 
vending machine, the air temperature may not exceed 5 [deg]C for more 
than 30 minutes immediately after the machine is filled, serviced, or 
re-stocked. Because of this, Coca-Cola suggested that it would be 
impractical to have a test where a product is maintained over 
40[emsp14][deg]F for 1 hour, and that should such a test be conducted, 
it should be for information only. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 10)
    DOE appreciates the comments submitted by SVA that the duration of 
the refrigeration low power mode verification test may not be long 
enough to reach 40[emsp14][deg]F and agrees that the time it takes the 
refrigerated cabinet to reach such a temperature will be dependent on a 
number of things, including the insulation effectiveness. DOE based is 
original proposed duration of 2 hours on available test data from a 
range of BVM models employing low power mode. Based on the BVM models 
for which DOE had data, all BVM units had reached a temperature of at 
least 40[emsp14][deg]F within 2 hours. However, DOE does not wish to 
disincentivize BVM manufacturers from increasing the energy efficiency 
of equipment by increasing the insulation level on the refrigerated 
compartment, if doing so

[[Page 45787]]

would prevent the case from being able to meet the refrigeration low 
power mode verification test. Therefore, DOE is changing the 
refrigeration low power mode verification test duration to 6 hours. 
That is, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the following provisions 
for the refrigeration low power mode test. In order for a manufacturer 
to apply the refrigeration low power mode credit to a particular BVM 
unit, the BVM unit must either:
    A. Satisfy the following three requirements:
    (1) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature 
must reach at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average 
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as applicable, 
within 6 hours;
    (2) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature 
must be maintained at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated 
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as 
applicable, for at least 1 hour; and
    (3) After the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage 
temperature is maintained at or above 4[emsp14][deg]F above the 
integrated average temperature or lowest application product 
temperature, as applicable, for at least 1 hour, the refrigerated 
beverage vending machine must return to the specified integrated 
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as 
applicable, automatically without direct physical intervention; or
    B. Not activate the compressor for the entire 6 hour period, in 
which case the instantaneous average beverage temperature does not have 
to reach 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average temperature or 
lowest application product temperature, as applicable, but, the 
equipment must still automatically return to the integrated average 
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as applicable, 
after the 6 hour period without direct physical intervention.
    DOE notes that the temperature threshold of at least 
4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average temperature, or 
40[emsp14][deg]F for most equipment, was selected based on the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency's ENERGY STAR[supreg] \15\ Product 
Specification for Refrigeration Beverage Vending Machines, Version 
3.1,\16\ which requires that qualified beverage vending machines 
include either a lighting low power state, refrigeration low power 
state, or whole machine low power state. ENERGY STAR further defines 
refrigeration low power state as a state in which the average beverage 
temperature is allowed to rise to 40[emsp14][deg]F or higher for an 
extended period of time. Given its use in other industry standards, DOE 
believes it is consistent to reference a similar temperature threshold 
when defining refrigeration low power mode in the DOE test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ENERGY STAR is a joint program of the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency and DOE that establishes a voluntary rating, 
certification, and labeling program for highly energy efficient 
consumer products and commercial equipment. Information on the 
program is available at www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=home.index.
    \16\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ENERGY STAR Program 
Requirements for Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines--Eligibility 
Criteria: Version 3.1. Revised December 2013. https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/specs//private/Vending%20Machines%20Program%20Requirements%20Version%203%201.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to Coca-Cola's comment regarding refrigerated beverage 
vending machines designed to vend perishable products, DOE notes that 
if a beverage vending machine is not equipped with a refrigeration low 
power mode because it is designed to vend perishable products, then it 
will not be eligible for the refrigeration low power mode credit. As 
such, this optional test procedure to verify the existence of a 
refrigeration low power mode would not be applicable to such 
refrigerated beverage vending machines. The provisions for testing 
refrigerated beverage vending machines equipped with a refrigeration 
low power mode do not require BVM models to be sold with such a feature 
or preclude BVM models from being sold without a refrigeration low 
power mode.
    Additionally, DOE wishes to mention that, as previously discussed 
in the context of operating temperatures, manufacturers should test and 
rate their basic models for the purposes of certification using only 
those controls with which units of the given basic model is are 
distributed in commerce and intended to be used in the field. Moreover, 
the use of any control schemes designed solely for the purposes of 
conducting the DOE test that are not available on the beverage vending 
machine as it is distributed in commerce cannot be used during the 
test. If a manufacturer produces a design which it believes should be 
qualified for the refrigeration low power mode credit but which cannot 
meet the verification requirements as outlined above, the manufacturer 
should apply submit a petition for a test procedure waiver for that 
basic model in accordance with the provisions in 10 CFR 431.401, as 
noted above in section III.B.2.

C. Other Amendments and Clarifications

    DOE is also amending 10 CFR 429.52(b) to clarify the reporting 
requirements at 10 CFR 429.52(b). Similarly, DOE is amending the 
introductory language found in 10 CFR 431.296 to clarify the 
applicability of the DEC measured in accordance with the test procedure 
to the energy conservation standards listed in that section.
    In this section, DOE discusses DOE's proposed amendments regarding 
the certification and reporting requirements for beverage vending 
machines, comments DOE received on these issues, DOE's response to any 
comments received, and the final amendments being adopted as part of 
this final rule. In section III.C.1, DOE also discusses comments 
received that are not related to any of the specific test procedure 
amendments.
1. Clarifications to the Scope of the BVM Regulations
    In written comments received in response to the 2014 BVM test 
procedure NOPR, AMS stated that vending machines that do not dispense 
beverages should be completely excluded from the scope of this 
rulemaking. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 4)
    In response to AMS's comment, DOE notes that all equipment meeting 
the definition of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine established by EPCA are subject to DOE's regulations, including 
the DOE test procedure and applicable energy conservation standards. 
Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine is defined as 
``a commercial refrigerator that cools bottled or canned beverages and 
dispenses the bottled or canned beverages on payment.'' 10 CFR 431.292 
To explicitly include any beverage vending machines that may vend 
cooled beverages that are in unusual containers, DOE also defines 
``bottled or canned beverage'' as ``a beverage in a sealed container.'' 
Therefore, as noted by AMS, vending machines that do not cool or 
dispense beverages in sealed containers do not meet the definition of a 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine and, as such, 
are not subject to DOE's regulations for refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines.
2. Clarifications to Certification and Reporting Requirements
    DOE notes that 10 CFR 429.52(b)(2) contains requirements for 
certification reports for covered beverage vending

[[Page 45788]]

machines. Specifically, DOE requires reporting of ``maximum average 
daily energy consumption.'' However, the outcome of the DOE test 
procedure is the measured ``daily energy consumption'' for a given 
model of beverage vending machine. To be consistent, DOE proposed in 
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR to update the reporting requirements 
at 10 CFR 429.52(b)(2) to require certification reports to include 
``daily energy consumption'' rather than ``maximum average daily energy 
consumption.'' 79 FR at 46927.
    The ``daily energy consumption'' of a given BVM basic model 
measured using the DOE test procedure and reported in accordance with 
10 CFR 429.52(b)(2) should be compared to the ``maximum daily energy 
consumption'' for the basic model's respective equipment class in the 
standard table in 10 CFR 431.296 to determine whether the basic model 
complies with the relevant standard. To clarify the relationship 
between these terms, DOE also proposed to update the language at 10 CFR 
431.296 to specify that the ``daily energy consumption'' (rather than 
the ``maximum daily energy consumption'') of each basic model of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine must not exceed 
the ``maximum daily energy consumption'' specified in the energy 
conservation standard table. Id.
    DOE did not receive any comments on the proposed amendments to 10 
CFR 429.52(b) with regards to reporting requirements for beverage 
vending machines, or the introductory language found in 10 CFR 431.296 
to clarify the applicability of the DEC measured in accordance with the 
test procedure to the energy conservation standards listed in that 
section. Therefore, DOE is adopting the proposed clarifications 
discussed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR with no modifications.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that test 
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory 
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 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 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 (IFRA) for 
any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the 
agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small 
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 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 DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made 
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General 
Counsel's Web site: http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
    DOE reviewed the proposed rule, which would amend the test 
procedure for beverage vending machines, under the provisions of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on 
February 19, 2003. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE certified 
that the proposed rule, if adopted, would not result in a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. DOE did not receive 
comments on the economic impacts of the test procedure. Therefore, DOE 
continues to certify that the test procedure amendments set forth in 
this final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. The factual basis for this certification is 
set forth below.
    For the BVM manufacturing industry, the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) has set a size threshold, which defines those 
entities classified as ``small businesses'' for the purpose of the 
statute. DOE used the SBA's size standards to determine whether any 
small entities would be required to comply with the rule. The size 
standards are codified at 13 CFR part 121. The size standards are 
listed by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 
code and industry description, and are available at www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. In the 2007 version of 
the NAICS codes, BVM manufacturers were classified under NAICS 333311, 
``Automatic Vending Machine Manufacturing.'' The SBA set a threshold of 
500 employees or less for an entity to be considered as a small 
business for this category. The 2011 Certification, Compliance, & 
Enforcement final rule (herein referred to as 2011 CC&E final rule) 
indicates that the NAICS code associated with beverage vending machines 
was 333311 and the small business threshold was 500 employees as of the 
date of that final rule 76 FR 12422, 12448 (March 7, 2011). In 2012, 
NAICS published an updated set of codes that contained some significant 
changes in the classification of various manufacturing industries from 
those established in 2007 and referenced in the CC&E final rule, 
including consolidating manufacturers that were previously classified 
under 333311 to NAICS code 333318. 77 FR 49991, 50000 (Aug. 20, 2012). 
As prescribed by the 2012 NAICS code updates, in this final rule (as 
well as in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR) DOE has referenced the 
2012 NAICS code 333318, ``Other Commercial and Service Industry 
Machinery Manufacturing,'' as applicable to BVM manufacturers. The SBA 
sets a threshold of 1,000 employees or less for an entity to be 
considered as a small business for this category.
    DOE conducted a market survey of manufacturers of equipment covered 
by this rulemaking using all available public information. DOE's 
research involved the review of individual company Web sites and 
marketing research tools (e.g., Dun and Bradstreet reports, Manta) to 
create a list of companies that manufacture or sell beverage vending 
machines covered by this rulemaking. Using these sources, DOE 
identified eight manufacturers of beverage vending machines.
    DOE then reviewed the data to determine whether the entities met 
the SBA's definition of a small business manufacturer of beverage 
vending machines and screened out companies that do not offer equipment 
covered by this rulemaking, do not meet the definition of a ``small 
business,'' or are foreign owned and operated. Based on this review, 
DOE has identified four companies that would be considered small 
manufacturers; this represents 50 percent of the national BVM 
manufacturers.
    Table IV.1 groups the small businesses according to their number of 
employees. The smallest company has 2 employees and the largest company 
has 375 employees. According to DOE's analysis, total annual revenues 
associated with these small manufacturers were estimated at $108.5 
million ($27.1 million average annual revenue per small manufacturer).

[[Page 45789]]



                             Table IV.1--Small Business Size by Number of Employees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of     Percentage of
                       Number of employees                             small           small        Cumulative
                                                                    businesses      businesses      percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-50............................................................               1            25.0            25.0
51-100..........................................................               1            25.0            50.0
101-1000........................................................               2            50.0           100.0
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................               4  ..............  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The total annual revenue for all small business is calculated as the average annual revenue per small business
  in each employee size bin multiplied by the number of small businesses in that bin. Note, the value in the
  total value may not correspond directly to the average data due to rounding.

    This final rule updates and incorporates several additional 
amendments to clarify ambiguities in the industry test procedure 
incorporated by reference into the DOE test procedure for beverage 
vending machines. In addition, DOE is incorporating revisions to the 
DOE test procedure that:
    (1) Eliminate testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test 
condition,
    (2) clarify the test procedure for combination vending machines,
    (3) clarify the requirements for loading BVM models under the DOE 
test procedure,
    (4) clarify the specifications of the test package,
    (5) clarify the next-to-vend beverage temperature test condition,
    (6) specify placement of thermocouples during the DOE test 
procedure,
    (7) establish testing provisions at the lowest application product 
temperature,
    (8) clarify the treatment of certain accessories when conducting 
the DOE test procedure, and
    (9) add a method to account for energy impacts of low power modes.
    Manufacturers are currently required to test Class A and Class B 
beverage vending machines using the DOE test procedure established in 
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule (71 FR 71340; Dec. 8, 2006) to 
show compliance with existing energy conservation standards established 
in the 2009 BVM energy conservation standard final rule (74 FR 44914; 
Aug. 31, 2009). That test procedure incorporates by reference ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 and ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, and consists of one 
24-hour test at standard rating conditions to determine the DEC of 
covered beverage vending machines during a representative cycle of use. 
71 FR 71340, 71355 (Dec. 8, 2006). DOE estimates the cost of conducting 
the DOE current test procedure to be $5,000 for each BVM unit for the 
24-hour test.
    Six of the amendments in this test procedure final rule will not 
change the testing burden for refrigerated beverage vending machines. 
These amendments serve only to establish new definitions and provide 
clarification to DOE's existing test procedure requirements. As 
discussed in section III.A.1 of this final rule, updating the reference 
to an industry test procedure and other minor clarifications of the 
referenced industry test procedure will not change the test procedure 
burden because it will not change the technical requirements of the 
test procedure. Other amendments that do not change the testing burden 
for refrigerated beverage vending machines include the amendments 
regarding the test procedure for combination vending machines, loading 
the vending machines when conducting the test procedure, specifying the 
characteristics of the test package, clarifying the next-to-vend 
temperature test condition, and specifying the placement of 
thermocouples during testing.
    The remaining amendments in this test procedure rule may affect the 
test procedure burden and the expected incremental increases or 
decreases in cost for conducting the test procedure are discussed in 
the following paragraphs.
    DOE estimated the cost of labor using an average hourly salary of 
$42.65 for an engineer.\17\ Including fringe benefits, which are 
estimated to be 30 percent of total compensation, the total hourly cost 
to an employer is estimated to be $55.45.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2014. 
National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. Washington, DC. 
Available at www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#17-0000.
    \18\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2014. 
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation--Management, Professional, 
and Related Employees. Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Eliminating testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition 
will substantially lessen the testing burden on manufacturers, as it 
decreases the testing requirements from two tests to one test per BVM 
unit. DOE estimates this decrease in burden to be 10 hours of labor and 
60 hours of facility use, which reduces the testing cost for each BVM 
unit by roughly $2,500, or half the cost of conducting the existing 
test procedure.
    Establishing testing provisions at the lowest application product 
temperature affects only a very small percentage of equipment on the 
market, estimated to be less than 2 percent of shipments. Manufacturers 
who make equipment affected by this provision should experience a 
decrease in burden because they will no longer have to seek waivers for 
equipment that cannot maintain the 36[emsp14][deg]F 1[deg]F 
average next-to-vend temperature for the duration of the test. For 
these manufacturers, DOE estimates this will save 4 hours of labor to 
develop an alternate test procedure and submit the waiver application 
for each beverage vending machine basic model, or $221.80 for each 
beverage vending machine basic model.
    Clarifying the treatment of various components and accessories in 
the DOE test procedure should not alter the technical requirements of 
the DOE test procedure, because these additional specifications are 
meant to clarify existing requirements. However, DOE understands that 
the treatment of some of these accessories and components may have been 
inconsistent due to the lack of clarity or misinterpretation of the DOE 
test procedure. Therefore, DOE is accounting for the incremental burden 
associated with properly configuring BVM models for testing in 
accordance with these clarified component specifications. The specific 
clarifications pertain to money processing devices, interior lighting, 
external displays and screens, anti-sweat heaters, condensate pan 
heaters and pumps, illuminated temperature displays, condenser filters, 
security covers, coated coils, general purpose outlets, and crankcase 
heaters and electric resistance heaters for cold weather. The 
adjustments to these accessories will require additional attention by 
the engineers conducting the test. DOE estimates the additional cost to 
be $110.90 for each model tested based on 1 hour of an engineer's time

[[Page 45790]]

to make all the applicable adjustments to the components and 
accessories prior to testing and 1 hour of an engineer's time to attend 
to the components and accessories of the model during testing.
    Amendments in this final rule that expand the testing methodology 
to incorporate lighting and control settings to account for low power 
modes will require additional attention by test personnel. Regarding 
the accessory low power test, DOE estimates it will require 1 hour to 
make any necessary adjustments to begin low power mode operation at 
that time. During the active vending mode test procedure, DOE estimates 
that it will take a maximum of 10 additional hours of an engineer's 
time to periodically monitor the operation of the tested unit and 
interact with the unit, if necessary to ensure that the unit does not 
re-enter a low power mode state. DOE does not believe that multiplying 
the DEC by 0.97 to account for refrigeration low power mode will 
increase the burden associated with conducting the DOE test procedure. 
However, DOE is also proposing an optional refrigeration low power mode 
verification test that manufacturers may elect to perform to ensure 
their equipment meets the requirements of a refrigeration low power 
mode, which would increase the test burden. DOE estimates that this 
test would require an additional 4 hours of test time, 2 hours to allow 
the refrigeration low power mode to initiate and maintain the adjusted 
refrigeration state, and an assumed 2 hours to return to 36 [deg]F 
 1 [deg]F to verify that the BVM model can automatically 
return to vending conditions. DOE estimates the incremental costs 
associated with conducting the low power mode test as $609.95 for each 
model tested, based on the assumption that it would take an engineer an 
additional 11 hours to attend to the tested model. Including the 
optional refrigeration low power mode verification test method, the 
incremental cost of the low power mode test procedure amendments is 
$831.75.
    All of the amendments and clarifications in this final rule, taken 
together, will result in an overall reduction in burden for small 
manufacturers conducting the DOE test procedure, primarily due to the 
removal of the requirement to test at the 90 [deg]F ambient condition. 
On average, the cost of testing covered beverage vending machines would 
be reduced by approximately $1,650 per basic model, or by 34 percent 
per small manufacturer, not including the optional tests that are not 
required for certification of BVM models. Table IV.2 summarizes the 
amendments in this final rule that impact manufacturer burden. However, 
note that different test procedure provisions are applicable to 
different BVM models and configurations and, as such, the sum of these 
provisions does not represent the ``total incremental change in 
burden'' for each tested BVM model under the test procedure amendments 
adopted in this final rule.

    Table IV.2--Summary of Amendments that Impact Manufacturer Burden
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Change in burden
          Provision            (per model tested)        Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate 90 [deg]F ambient   -$2,500.............  Reduces half the
 test condition.                                     cost of the 2006
                                                     BVM test procedure.
Lowest application product    -221.80.............  4 hours of
 temperature testing (for                            engineer's time.
 certain models).
Treatment of accessories....  110.90..............  2 hours of
                                                     engineer's time.
Low power mode test.........  609.95..............  11 hours of
                                                     engineer's time.
                              831.75 (with          15 hours of
                               optional              engineer's time.
                               refrigeration low
                               power mode test).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the criteria outlined above, DOE certifies that the test 
procedure amendments would not have a ``significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.'' 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 beverage vending machines must certify to DOE that 
their products comply with any applicable energy conservation 
standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their 
products according to the DOE test procedure for beverage vending 
machines, including any amendments adopted for the test procedure. DOE 
has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping 
requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial 
equipment, including beverage vending machines. (76 FR 12422 (March 7, 
2011). DOE recently revised its estimated certification and record 
keeping requirements to an average of 30 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. 80 FR 5099 (Jan. 30, 2015). 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 updated certification requirement 
has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910-1400. Id.
    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 final rule, DOE amends its test procedure for beverage 
vending machines. DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class 
of actions that are categorically excluded from review under the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, this 
rule amends an existing rule without affecting the amount, quality or 
distribution of energy usage, and, therefore, will not result in any 
environmental impacts. Thus, this rulemaking is covered by Categorical 
Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, which applies to any 
rulemaking that interprets or amends an existing rule without changing 
the environmental effect of that rule. Accordingly, neither an 
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is 
required.

[[Page 45791]]

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), 
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism 
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the 
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would 
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess 
the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires 
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have Federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental 
consultation process it will follow in the development of such 
regulations. 65 FR at 13735. DOE examined this 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 this 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(d)) 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: (1) Clearly specifies the 
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing 
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction; 
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines 
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity 
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney 
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive 
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in 
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is 
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the 
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, 
this final rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal 
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the 
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). 
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 a written statement that estimates the 
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. 
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving 
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small 
governments before establishing any requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997, 
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for 
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR at 12820; also 
available at http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined 
this final rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and 
determined that the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, 
nor a mandate that may result in the 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. 
This final rule will 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 will not 
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth 
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under 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 this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has 
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those 
guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR at 
28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit 
to OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy 
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an 
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a 
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a 
significant energy action. For any 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, distribution, and use.
    This regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use

[[Page 45792]]

of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by 
the Administrator of OIRA. 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 Department of Energy Organization Act 
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), 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. (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA) 
Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed 
rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of 
proposed 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.
    This rule incorporates testing methods contained in ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 32.1-2010, ``Methods of Testing for Rating Vending Machines 
for Sealed Beverages.'' DOE has evaluated this standard and is unable 
to conclude whether it fully complies with the requirements of section 
32(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act (i.e., whether they were 
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 this standard 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 this 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).

N. Description of Standards Incorporated by Reference

    In this final rule, DOE is incorporating by reference a method of 
test published by ASHRAE and ANSI, titled ``Methods of Testing for 
Rating Vending Machines for Sealed Beverages,'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
32.1-2010. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 is an industry-accepted 
standard used to specify methods of testing for rating the capacity and 
efficiency of self-contained, mechanically refrigerated vending 
machines for sealed beverages. The DOE test procedure codified by this 
final rule references ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010. Copies of ASHRAE 
standards may be purchased from the American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers; 1791 Tullie Circle, NE. 
Atlanta, GA 30329, 404-636-8400, or www.ashrae.org.

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final 
rule.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 429

    Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household 
appliances, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 431

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Incorporation by reference, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 15, 2015.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and 
431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth 
below:

PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER 
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.

0
2. Section 429.52 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  429.52  Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Pursuant to Sec.  429.12(b)(13), a certification report must 
include the following additional public, equipment-specific 
information:
    (i) When using appendix A of subpart Q of part 431of this chapter, 
the daily energy consumption in kilowatt hours per day (kWh/day), the 
refrigerated volume (V) in cubic feet (ft\3\), whether testing was 
conducted with payment mechanism in place and operational, and, if 
applicable, the lowest application product temperature in degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F), if applicable.
    (ii) When using appendix B of subpart Q of part 431of this chapter, 
the daily energy consumption in kilowatt hours per day (kWh/day), the 
refrigerated volume (V) in cubic feet (ft\3\), whether testing was 
conducted with payment mechanism in place and operational, whether 
testing was conducted using an accessory low power mode, whether rating 
was based on the presence of a refrigeration low power mode, and, if 
applicable, the lowest application product temperature in degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F).

PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND 
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
3. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.

0
4. Section 431.291 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  431.291  Scope.

    This subpart specifies test procedures and energy conservation 
standards for certain commercial refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines, pursuant to part A of Title III of the 
Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309. 
The regulatory provisions of Sec. Sec.  430.33 and 430.34 and subparts 
D and E of part 430 of this chapter are applicable to refrigerated 
bottled or canned beverage vending machines.

0
5. Section 431.292 is amended by revising the definitions of 
``Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine'' and ``V'' 
to read as follows:


Sec.  431.292  Definitions concerning refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines.

* * * * *
    Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine means a 
commercial refrigerator (as defined at Sec.  431.62) that cools bottled 
or canned beverages and dispenses the bottled or canned beverages on 
payment.
* * * * *
    V means the refrigerated volume (ft\3\) of the refrigerated bottled 
or canned beverage vending machine, as measured by Appendix C of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).

0
6. Section 431.293 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:

[[Page 45793]]

Sec.  431.293  Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) ASHRAE. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, 1791 Tullie Circle, NE. Atlanta, GA 30329, 404-
636-8400, or www.ashrae.org.
    (1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, (``ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1''), 
``Methods of Testing for Rating Vending Machines for Sealed 
Beverages,'' approved July 23, 2010, IBR approved for Sec.  431.292 and 
appendices A and B to subpart Q of this part.
    (2) [Reserved]

0
7. Section 431.294 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  431.294  Uniform test method for the measurement of energy 
consumption of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machines.

* * * * *
    (b) Testing and Calculations. Determine the daily energy 
consumption of each covered refrigerated bottled or canned beverage 
vending machine by conducting the appropriate test procedure set forth 
in appendix A or B to this subpart.


Sec.  431.296  [Amended]

0
8. Section 431.296 is amended by removing the word ``maximum'' after 
``shall have a'' in the introductory text.

0
9. Subpart Q of part 431 is amended by adding appendices A and B to 
read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart Q of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the 
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Refrigerated Bottled or Canned 
Beverage Vending Machines

    Note:  Prior to January 27, 2016, manufacturers must make any 
representations with respect to the energy use or efficiency of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in 
accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this Appendix A 
or the procedures in 10 CFR 431.294 as it appeared in the edition of 
10 CFR parts 200 to 499 revised as of January 1, 2015. Any 
representations made with respect to the energy use or efficiency of 
such refrigerated beverage vending machines must be in accordance 
with whichever version is selected. On or after January 27, 2016, 
manufacturers must make any representations with respect to energy 
use or efficiency in accordance with the results of testing pursuant 
to this Appendix A to demonstrate compliance with the energy 
conservation standards at 10 CFR 431.296, for which compliance was 
required as of August 31, 2012.

    1. General. Section 3, ``Definitions''; section 4, 
``Instruments''; section 5, ``Vendible Capacity''; section 6, ``Test 
Conditions''; section 7.1, ``Test Procedures--General 
Requirements''; and section 7.2, ``Energy Consumption Test'' of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  431.293) 
apply to this appendix except as noted throughout this appendix. In 
cases where there is a conflict, the language of the test procedure 
in this appendix takes precedence over ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
    1.1. Instruments. In addition to the instrument accuracy 
requirements in section 4, ``Instruments,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293), humidity shall be 
measured with a calibrated instrument accurate to 2 
percent RH at the specified ambient relative humidity condition 
specified in section 2.1.2 of this appendix.
    1.2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions specified in 
section 3, ``Definitions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  431.293), the following definition is also 
applicable to this appendix.
    External accessory standby mode means the mode of operation in 
which any external, integral customer display signs, lighting, or 
digital screens:
    (1) Are connected to mains power;
    (2) Do not produce the intended illumination, display, or 
interaction functionality; and
    (3) Can be switched into another mode automatically with only a 
remote user-generated or an internal signal.
    Instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature means 
the spatial average of all standard test packages in the next-to-
vend beverages positions at a given time.
    Integrated average temperature means the average temperature of 
all standard test package measurements in the next-to-vend beverage 
positions taken over the duration of the test, expressed in degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F).
    Lowest application product temperature means the lowest 
integrated average temperature a given basic model is capable of 
maintaining so as to comply with the temperature stabilization 
requirements specified in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).
    2. Test Procedure.
    2.1. Test Conditions. The test conditions specified in section 
6, ``Test Conditions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  431.293) apply to this appendix except that in 
section 6.1, ``Voltage and Frequency,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, the 
voltage and frequency tolerances specified in section 6.1.a of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 also apply equivalently to section 6.1.b of ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1 for equipment with dual nameplate voltages.
    2.1.1. Average Beverage Temperature. The integrated average 
temperature measured during the test must be within 1 
[deg]F of the value specified in Table A.1 of this appendix or the 
lowest application product temperature for models tested in 
accordance with paragraph 2.1.3 of this appendix. The measurement of 
integrated average temperature must begin after temperature 
stabilization has been achieved and continue for the following 24 
consecutive hours. All references to ``Table 1'' in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293) shall instead be 
interpreted as references to Table A.1 of this appendix and all 
references to ``average beverage temperature'' in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
shall instead be interpreted as references to the integrated average 
temperature as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix of this 
subpart, except as noted in section 2.1.1.1 of this appendix.
    2.1.1.1. Temperature Stabilization. Temperature stabilization 
shall be determined in accordance with section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference Sec.  431.293), except that 
the reference to ``average beverage temperature'' shall instead 
refer to the ``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage 
temperature,'' as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix, and the 
reference to ``Table 1'' shall instead refer to Table A.1 of this 
appendix. That is, temperature stabilization is considered to be 
achieved 24 hours after the instantaneous average next-to-vend 
beverage temperature reaches the specified value (see Table A.1) and 
energy consumption for two successive 6 hour periods are within 2 
percent of each other.
    2.1.2. Ambient Test Conditions. The refrigerated bottled or 
canned beverage vending machine must be tested at the test 
conditions and tolerances specified in the following Table A.1 of 
this appendix. The specified ambient temperature and humidity 
conditions shall be maintained within the ranges specified for each 
recorded measurement. All references to ``Table 1'' in ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293) shall instead be 
interpreted as references to Table A.1 of this appendix. In contrast 
to the requirements of section 6.1 and Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, 
conduct testing only one time at the conditions referenced in Table 
A.1 of this appendix. Testing at alternate ambient conditions is not 
required or permitted.

               Table A.1--Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Specified Value and Tolerance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Acceptable range  (based on
     Test and pretest condition               Value                 Tolerance            value and tolerance)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instantaneous Average Next-to-Vend   36 [deg]F.............  1 [deg]F..  35-37 [deg]F.
 Temperature.
Integrated Average Temperature.....  36 [deg]F.............  1 [deg]F..  N/A (value is averaged
                                                                                      throughout test).

[[Page 45794]]

 
Ambient Temperature................  75 [deg]F.............  2 [deg]F..  73-77 [deg]F.
Relative Humidity..................  45 percent RH.........  5 percent   40-50 percent RH.
                                                              RH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2.1.3. Lowest Application Product Temperature. If a refrigerated 
bottled or canned beverage vending machine is not capable of 
maintaining an integrated average temperature of 36 [deg]F (1 [deg]F) during the 24 hour test period, the unit must be 
tested at the lowest application product temperature, as defined in 
section 1.2 of this appendix. For refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines equipped with a thermostat, the lowest 
application product temperature is the integrated average 
temperature achieved at the lowest thermostat setting.
    2.2. Equipment Installation and Test Set Up. Except as provided 
in this appendix, the test procedure for energy consumption of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines shall be 
conducted in accordance with the methods specified in sections 7.1 
through 7.2.2.3 under ``Test Procedures'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).
    2.2.1. Equipment Loading. Configure refrigerated bottled or 
canned beverage vending machines to hold the maximum number of 
standard products in the refrigerated compartment(s) and place 
standard test packages as specified in section 2.2.1.1 or 2.2.1.2 of 
this appendix.
    2.2.1.1. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with 
Products Arranged Horizontally. For refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines with products arranged horizontally (e.g., 
on shelves or in product spirals), place standard test packages in 
the refrigerated compartment(s) in the following locations, as shown 
in Figure A.1:
    (a) For odd-number shelves, when counting starting from the 
bottom shelf, standard test packages shall be placed at:
    (1) The left-most next-to-vend product location,
    (2) The right-most next-to-vend product location, and
    (3) For equipment with greater than or equal to five next-to-
vend product locations on each shelf, either:
    (A) The next-to-vend product location in the center of the shelf 
(i.e., equidistant from the left-most and right-most next-to-vend 
product locations) if there are an odd number of next-to-vend 
products on the shelf or
    (B) The next-to-vend product location immediately to the right 
and the left of the center position if there are an even number of 
next-to-vend products on the shelf.
    (b) For even-numbered shelves, when counting from the bottom 
shelf, standard test packages shall be places at either:
    (1) For equipment with less than or equal to six next-to-vend 
product locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product 
location(s):
    (A) One location towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location; and
    (B) One location towards to the center from the right-most next-
to-vend product location, or
    (2) For equipment with greater than six next-to-vend product 
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product locations
    (A) Two locations towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location; and
    (B) Two locations towards to the center from the right-most 
next-to-vend product location.

[[Page 45795]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.023

    2.2.1.2. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with 
Products Arranged Vertically. For refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines with products arranged vertically (e.g., 
in stacks), place standard test packages in the refrigerated 
compartment(s) in each next-to-vend product location.
    2.2.1.3. Loading of Combination Vending Machines. For 
combination vending machines, the non-refrigerated compartment(s) 
must not be loaded with any standard products, test packages, or 
other vendible merchandise.
    2.2.1.4. Standard Products. The standard product shall be 
standard 12-ounce aluminum beverage cans filled with a liquid with a 
density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/mL)  0.1 g/mL at 
36[emsp14][deg]F. For product storage racks that are not capable of 
vending 12-ounce cans, but are capable of vending 20-ounce bottles, 
the standard product shall be 20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a 
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL  0.1 g/mL at 
36[emsp14][deg]F. For product storage racks that are not capable of 
vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles, the standard product 
shall be the packaging and contents specified by the manufacturer in 
product literature as the standard product (i.e., the specific 
merchandise the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine is designed to vend).
    2.2.1.5. Standard Test Packages. A standard test package is a 
standard product, as specified in 2.2.1.4 of this appendix, altered 
to include a temperature-measuring instrument at its center of mass.
    2.2.2. Sensor Placement. The integrated average temperature of 
next-to-vend beverages shall be measured in standard test packages 
in the next-to-vend product locations specified in section 2.2.1.1 
of this appendix. Do not run the thermocouple wire and other 
measurement apparatus through the dispensing door; the thermocouple 
wire and other measurement apparatus must be configured and sealed 
so as to minimize air flow between the interior refrigerated volume 
and the ambient room air. If a manufacturer chooses to employ a 
method other than routing thermocouple and sensor wires through the 
door gasket and ensuring the gasket is compressed around the wire to 
ensure a good seal, then it must maintain a record of the method 
used in the data underlying that basic model's certification 
pursuant to 10 CFR 429.71.
    2.2.3. Accessories. (a) All standard components that would be 
used during normal operation of the model in the field and are 
necessary to provide sufficient functionality for cooling and 
vending products in field installations (i.e., product inventory, 
temperature management, product merchandising (including, e.g., 
lighting or signage), product selection, and product transport and 
delivery) shall be in place during testing and shall be set to the 
maximum energy-consuming setting if manually adjustable, except that 
the specific components and accessories listed in the subsequent 
sections shall be operated as stated. Components not necessary for 
the inventory, temperature management, product merchandising (e.g., 
lighting or signage), product selection, and or product transport 
and delivery shall be de-energized. If systems not required for the 
primary functionality of the machine as stated in this section 
cannot be de-energized without preventing the operation of the 
machine, then they shall be placed in the lowest energy consuming 
state.
    (b) Instead of testing pursuant to section 7.2.2.4 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293), provide, 
if necessary, any physical stimuli or other input to the machine 
needed to prevent automatic activation of energy management systems 
that can be adjusted by the machine operator during the test period. 
Automatic energy management systems that cannot be adjusted by the 
machine operator may be enabled, as specified by section 7.2.1 of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
    2.2.3.1. Payment Mechanisms. Refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines shall be tested with no payment mechanism 
in place, the payment mechanism in place but de-energized, or the 
payment mechanism in place but set to the lowest energy consuming 
state, if it cannot be de-energized. A default payment mechanism 
energy consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day shall be added to the 
primary rated energy consumption per day, as required in section 2.3 
of this appendix.

[[Page 45796]]

    2.2.3.2. Internal Lighting. All lighting that is contained 
within or is part of the internal physical boundary of the 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine, as 
established by the top, bottom, and side panels of the equipment, 
shall be placed in its maximum energy consuming state.
    2.2.3.3. External Customer Display Signs, Lights, and Digital 
Screens. All external customer display signs, lights, and digital 
screens that are independent from the refrigeration or vending 
performance of the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine must be disconnected, disabled, or otherwise de-energized 
for the duration of testing. Customer display signs, lighting, and 
digital screens that are integrated into the beverage vending 
machine cabinet or controls such that they cannot be de-energized 
without disabling the refrigeration or vending functions of the 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine or modifying 
the circuitry must be placed in external accessory standby mode, if 
available, or their lowest energy-consuming state. Digital displays 
that also serve a vending or money processing function must be 
placed in the lowest energy-consuming state that still allows the 
money processing feature to function.
    2.2.3.4. Anti-sweat and Other Electric Resistance Heaters. Anti-
sweat and other electric resistance heaters must be operational 
during the entirety of the test procedure. Units with a user-
selectable setting must have the heaters energized and set to the 
most energy-consumptive position. Units featuring an automatic, non-
user-adjustable controller that turns on or off based on 
environmental conditions must be operating in the automatic state. 
Units that are not shipped with a controller from the point of 
manufacture, but are intended to be used with a controller, must be 
equipped with an appropriate controller when tested.
    2.2.3.5. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps. All electric 
resistance condensate heaters and condensate pumps must be installed 
and operational during the test. Prior to the start of the test, 
including the 24 hour period used to determine temperature 
stabilization, as described in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section 7.2.2.2 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293), the condensate pan 
must be dry. For the duration of the test, including the 24 hour 
time period necessary for temperature stabilization, allow any 
condensate moisture generated to accumulate in the pan. Do not 
manually add or remove water from the condensate pan at any time 
during the test.
    2.2.3.6. Illuminated Temperature Displays. All illuminated 
temperature displays must be energized and operated during the test 
the same way they would be energized and operated during normal 
field operation, as recommended in manufacturer product literature, 
including manuals.
    2.2.3.7. Condenser Filters. Remove any nonpermanent filters 
provided to prevent particulates from blocking a model's condenser 
coil.
    2.2.3.8. Security Covers. Remove any devices used to secure the 
model from theft or tampering.
    2.2.3.9. General Purpose Outlets. During the test, do not 
connect any external load to any general purpose outlets available 
on a unit.
    2.2.3.10. Crankcase Heaters and Other Electric Resistance 
Heaters for Cold Weather. Crankcase heaters and other electric 
resistance heaters for cold weather must be operational during the 
test. If a control system, such as a thermostat or electronic 
controller, is used to modulate the operation of the heater, it must 
be activated during the test and operated in accordance with the 
manufacturer's instructions.
    2.2.4. Sampling and Recording of Data. Record the data listed in 
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  431.293) at least every 1 minute. For the purpose of this 
subsection, ``average beverage temperature,'' listed in section 
7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, means ``instantaneous average next-to-
vend beverage temperature.''
    2.3. Determination of Daily Energy Consumption. Determine the 
daily energy consumption of each tested refrigerated bottled or 
canned beverage vending machine as the sum of:
    (a) The default payment mechanism energy consumption value from 
section 2.2.3.1 of this appendix and
    (b) The primary rated energy consumption per day (ED), in kWh, 
and determined in accordance with the calculation procedure in 
section 7.2.3.1, ``Calculation of Daily Energy Consumption,'' of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).
    2.3.1. Calculations and Rounding. In all cases, the primary 
rated energy consumption per day (ED) must be calculated with raw 
measured values and rounded to units of 0.01 kWh/day.
    3. Determination of Refrigerated Volume, Vendible Capacity, and 
Surface Area.
    3.1. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the ``refrigerated volume'' 
of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in 
accordance with appendix C, ``Measurement of Volume,'' of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293). For 
combination vending machines, the ``refrigerated volume'' does not 
include any non-refrigerated compartments.
    3.2. Vendible Capacity. Determine the ``vendible capacity'' of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in 
accordance with the first paragraph of section 5, ``Vending Machine 
Capacity,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  431.293). For combination vending machines, the ``vendible 
capacity'' includes only the capacity of any portion of the 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is 
refrigerated and does not include the capacity of the non-
refrigerated compartment(s).

Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the 
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Refrigerated Bottled or Canned 
Beverage Vending Machines

    Note: After January 27, 2016, manufacturers must make any 
representations with respect to energy use or efficiency in 
accordance with the results of testing pursuant to appendix A of 
this subpart to demonstrate compliance with the energy conservation 
standards at 10 CFR 431.296, for which compliance was required as of 
August 31, 2012. Alternatively, manufacturers may make 
representations based on testing in accordance with this appendix 
prior to the compliance date of any amended energy conservation 
standards, provided that such representations demonstrate compliance 
with such amended energy conservation standards. Any representations 
made on or after the compliance date of any amended energy 
conservation standards, must be made in accordance with the results 
of testing pursuant to this appendix. Any representations made with 
respect to the energy use or efficiency of such refrigerated 
beverage vending machines must be in accordance with whichever 
version is selected.

    1. General. Section 3, ``Definitions''; section 4, 
``Instruments''; section 5, ``Vendible Capacity''; section 6, ``Test 
Conditions''; section 7.1, ``Test Procedures--General 
Requirements''; and section 7.2, ``Energy Consumption Test'' of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  431.293) 
apply to this appendix except as noted throughout this appendix. In 
cases where there is a conflict, the language of the test procedure 
in this appendix takes precedence over ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
    1.1. Instruments. In addition to the instrument accuracy 
requirements in section 3, ``Instruments,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293), humidity shall be 
measured with a calibrated instrument accurate to 2 
percent RH at the specified ambient relative humidity condition 
specified in section 2.1.3 of this appendix.
    1.2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions specified in 
section 3, ``Definitions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  431.293) the following definitions are also 
applicable to this appendix.
    Accessory low power mode means a state in which a beverage 
vending machine's lighting and/or other energy-using systems are in 
low power mode, but that is not a refrigeration low power mode. 
Functions that may constitute an accessory low power mode may 
include, for example, dimming or turning off lights, but does not 
include adjustment of the refrigeration system to elevate the 
temperature of the refrigerated compartment(s).
    External accessory standby mode means the mode of operation in 
which any external, integral customer display signs, lighting, or 
digital screens are connected to mains power; do not produce the 
intended illumination, display, or interaction functionality; and 
can be switched into another mode automatically with only a remote 
user-generated or an internal signal.
    Instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature means 
the spatial average of all standard test packages in the next-to-
vend beverages positions at a given time.
    Integrated average temperature means the average temperature of 
all standard test package measurements in the next-to-vend

[[Page 45797]]

beverage positions taken over the duration of the test, expressed in 
degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F).
    Low power mode means a state in which a beverage vending 
machine's lighting, refrigeration, and/or other energy-using systems 
are automatically adjusted (without user intervention) such that 
they consume less energy than they consume in an active vending 
environment.
    Lowest application product temperature means the lowest 
integrated average temperature a given basic model is capable of 
maintaining so as to comply with the temperature stabilization 
requirements specified in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).
    Refrigeration low power mode means a state in which a beverage 
vending machine's refrigeration system is in low power mode because 
of elevation of the temperature of the refrigerated compartment(s). 
To qualify as low power mode, the unit must satisfy the requirements 
described in section 2.3.2.1 of this appendix.
    2. Test Procedure.
    2.1. Test Conditions. The test conditions specified in section 
6, ``Test Conditions'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  431.293) apply to this appendix except that in 
section 6.1, ``Voltage and Frequency,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, the 
voltage and frequency tolerances specified in section 6.1.a of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 also apply equivalently to section 6.1.b of ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1 for equipment with dual nameplate voltages.
    2.1.1. Average Beverage Temperature. The integrated average 
temperature measured during the test must be within 1[emsp14][deg]F of the value specified in Table B.1 of this 
appendix or the lowest application product temperature for models 
tested in accordance with paragraph 2.1.3 of this appendix. The 
measurement of integrated average temperature must begin after 
temperature stabilization has been achieve and continue for the 
following 24 consecutive hours. All references to ``Table 1'' in 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293) 
shall instead be interpreted as references to Table B.1 of this 
appendix and all references to ``average beverage temperature'' in 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 shall instead be interpreted as references to the 
integrated average temperature as defined in section 1.2 of this 
appendix, except as noted in section 2.1.1.1 of this appendix.
    2.1.1.1. Temperature Stabilization. Temperature stabilization 
shall be determined in accordance with section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference Sec.  431.293), except that 
the reference to ``average beverage temperature'' shall instead 
refer to the ``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage 
temperature,'' as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix, and the 
reference to ``Table 1'' shall instead refer to Table A.1 of this 
appendix. That is, temperature stabilization is considered to be 
achieved 24 hours after the instantaneous average next-to-vend 
beverage temperature reaches the specified value (see Table A.1) and 
energy consumption for two successive 6 hour periods are within 2 
percent of each other.
    2.1.2. Ambient Test Conditions. The refrigerated bottled or 
canned beverage vending machine must be tested at the test 
conditions and tolerances specified in the following Table B.1 of 
this appendix. The specified ambient temperature and humidity 
conditions shall be maintained within the ranges specified for each 
recorded measurement. All references to ``Table 1'' in ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293) shall instead be 
interpreted as references to Table B.1 of this appendix. In contrast 
to the requirements of section 6.1 and Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, 
conduct testing only one time at the conditions referenced in Table 
B.1 of this appendix. Testing at alternate ambient conditions is not 
required or permitted.

               Table B.1--Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Specified Value and Tolerance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      Acceptable range (based on
     Test and pretest condition               Value                 Tolerance            value and tolerance)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instantaneous Average Next-to-Vend   36 [deg]F.............  1 [deg]F..  35-37 [deg]F.
 Temperature.
Integrated Average Temperature.....  36 [deg]F.............  1 [deg]F..  N/A (value is averaged
                                                                                      throughout test).
Ambient Temperature................  75 [deg]F.............  2 [deg]F..  73-77 [deg]F.
Relative Humidity..................  45 percent RH.........  5 percent   40-50 percent RH.
                                                              RH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2.1.3. Lowest Application Product Temperature. If a refrigerated 
bottled or canned beverage vending machine is not capable of 
maintaining an integrated average temperature of 36[emsp14][deg]F 
(1[emsp14][deg]F) during the 24 hour test period, the 
unit must be tested at the lowest application product temperature, 
as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix. For refrigerated bottled 
or canned beverage vending machines equipped with a thermostat, the 
lowest application product temperature is the integrated average 
temperature achieved at the lowest thermostat setting.
    2.2. Equipment Installation and Test Set Up. Except as provided 
in this section 2.2 of appendix, the test procedure for energy 
consumption of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machines shall be conducted in accordance with the methods specified 
in sections 7.1 through 7.2.2.3 under ``Test Procedures'' of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).
    2.2.1. Equipment Loading. Configure refrigerated bottled or 
canned beverage vending machines to hold the maximum number of 
standard products, and place standard test packages in the 
refrigerated compartment(s) as specified in section 2.2.1.1 or 
2.2.1.2 of this appendix.
    2.2.1.1. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with 
Products Arranged Horizontally. For refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines with products arranged horizontally (e.g., 
on shelves or in product spirals), place standard test packages in 
the refrigerated compartment(s) in the following locations, as shown 
in Figure B.1:
    (a) For odd-number shelves, when counting starting from the 
bottom shelf, standard test packages shall be placed at:
    (1) The left-most next-to-vend product location;
    (2) The right-most next-to-vend product location; and
    (3) For equipment with greater than or equal to five product 
locations on each shelf, either:
    (i) The next-to-vend product location in the center of the shelf 
(i.e., equidistant from the left-most and right-most next-to-vend 
product locations) if there are an odd number of next-to-vend 
products on the shelf or,
    (ii) The next-to-vend product location immediately to the right 
and the left of the center position if there are an even number of 
next-to-vend products on the shelf.
    (b) For even-numbered shelves, when counting from the bottom 
shelf, standard test packages shall be places at either:
    (1) For equipment with less than or equal to six next-to-vend 
product locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product 
location(s);
    (i) One position towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location; and
    (ii) One location towards to the center from the right-most 
next-to-vend product location; or
    (2) For equipment with greater than six next-to-vend product 
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product locations:
    (i) Two selections towards the center from the left-most next-
to-vend product location; and
    (ii) Two locations towards to the center from the right-most 
next-to-vend product location.

[[Page 45798]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.024

    2.2.1.2. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with 
Products Arranged Vertically. For refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines with products arranged vertically (e.g., 
in stacks), place standard test packages in the refrigerated 
compartment(s) in each next-to-vend product location.
    2.2.1.3. Loading of Combination Vending Machines. For 
combination vending machines, the non-refrigerated compartment(s) 
must not be loaded with any standard products, test packages, or 
other vendible merchandise.
    2.2.1.4. Standard Products. The standard product shall be 
standard 12-ounce aluminum beverage cans filled with a liquid with a 
density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/mL) 0.1 g/mL at 
36[emsp14][deg]F. For product storage racks that are not capable of 
vending 12-ounce cans, but are capable of vending 20-ounce bottles, 
the standard product shall be 20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a 
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL 0.1 g/mL at 36[deg]F. 
For product storage racks that are not capable of vending 12-ounce 
cans or 20-ounce bottles, the standard product shall be the 
packaging and contents specified by the manufacturer in product 
literature as the standard product (i.e., the specific merchandise 
the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine is 
designed to vend).
    2.2.1.5. Standard Test Packages. A standard test package is a 
standard product, as specified in 2.2.1.4 of this appendix, altered 
to include a temperature-measuring instrument at its center of mass.
    2.2.2. Sensor Placement. The integrated average temperature of 
next-to-vend beverages shall be measured in standard test packages 
in the next-to-vend product locations specified in section 2.2.1.1 
of this appendix. Do not run the thermocouple wire and other 
measurement apparatus through the dispensing door; the thermocouple 
wire and other measurement apparatus must be configured and sealed 
so as to minimize air flow between the interior refrigerated volume 
and the ambient room air. If a manufacturer chooses to employ a 
method other than routing thermocouple and sensor wires through the 
door gasket and ensuring the gasket is compressed around the wire to 
ensure a good seal, then it must maintain a record of the method 
used in the data underlying that basic model's certification 
pursuant to 10 CFR 429.71.
    2.2.3. Vending Mode Test Period. The vending mode test period 
begins after temperature stabilization has been achieved, as 
described in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section 7.2.2.2 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  431.293) and continues for 18 hours for 
equipment with an accessory low power mode or for 24 hours for 
equipment without an accessory low power mode. For the vending mode 
test period, equipment that has energy-saving features that cannot 
be disabled shall have those features set to the most energy-
consuming settings, except for as specified in section 2.2.4 of this 
appendix. In addition, all energy management systems shall be 
disabled. Instead of testing pursuant to sections 7.1.1(d) and 
7.2.2.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, provide, if necessary, any physical 
stimuli or other input to the machine needed to prevent automatic 
activation of low power modes during the vending mode test period.
    2.2.4. Accessory Low Power Mode Test Period. For equipment with 
an accessory low power mode, the accessory low power mode may be 
engaged for 6 hours, beginning 18 hours after the temperature 
stabilization requirements established in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293) have been 
achieved, and continuing until the end of the 24-hour test period. 
During the accessory low power mode test, operate the refrigerated 
bottled or canned beverage vending machine with the lowest energy-
consuming lighting and control settings that constitute an accessory 
low power mode. The specification and tolerances for integrated 
average temperature in Table B.1 of this appendix still apply, and 
any refrigeration low power mode must not be engaged. Instead of 
testing pursuant to sections 7.1.1(d) and 7.2.2.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE 
32.1, provide, if necessary, any physical stimuli or other input to 
the machine needed to prevent automatic activation of refrigeration 
low power modes during the accessory low power mode test period.
    2.2.5. Accessories. Unless specified otherwise in this appendix, 
all standard

[[Page 45799]]

components that would be used during normal operation of the basic 
model in the field and are necessary to provide sufficient 
functionality for cooling and vending products in field 
installations (i.e., product inventory, temperature management, 
product merchandising(including, e.g., lighting or signage), product 
selection, and product transport and delivery) shall be in place 
during testing and shall be set to the maximum energy-consuming 
setting if manually adjustable. Components not necessary for the 
inventory, temperature management, product merchandising (e.g., 
lighting or signage), product selection, or product transport and 
delivery shall be de-energized. If systems not required for the 
primary functionality of the machine as stated in this section 
cannot be de-energized without preventing the operation of the 
machine, then they shall be placed in the lowest energy consuming 
state Components with controls that are permanently operational and 
cannot be adjusted by the machine operator shall be operated in 
their normal setting and consistent with the requirements of 2.2.3 
and 2.2.4 of this appendix. The specific components and accessories 
listed in the subsequent sections shall be operated as stated during 
the test, except when controlled as part of a low power mode during 
the low power mode test period.
    2.2.5.1 Payment Mechanisms. Refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines shall be tested with no payment mechanism 
in place, the payment mechanism in-place but de-energized, or the 
payment mechanism in place but set to the lowest energy consuming 
state, if it cannot be de-energized. A default payment mechanism 
energy consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day shall be added to the 
primary rated energy consumption per day, as noted in section 2.3 of 
this appendix.
    2.2.5.2. Internal Lighting. All lighting that is contained 
within or is part of the internal physical boundary of the 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine, as 
established by the top, bottom, and side panels of the equipment, 
shall be placed in its maximum energy consuming state.
    2.2.5.3. External Customer Display Signs, Lights, and Digital 
Screens. All external customer display signs, lights, and digital 
screens that are independent from the refrigeration or vending 
performance of the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine must be disconnected, disabled, or otherwise de-energized 
for the duration of testing. Customer display signs, lighting, and 
digital screens that are integrated into the beverage vending 
machine cabinet or controls such that they cannot be de-energized 
without disabling the refrigeration or vending functions of the 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine or modifying 
the circuitry must be placed in external accessory standby mode, if 
available, or their lowest energy-consuming state. Digital displays 
that also serve a vending or money processing function must be 
placed in the lowest energy-consuming state that still allows the 
money processing feature to function.
    2.2.5.4. Anti-sweat or Other Electric Resistance Heaters. Anti-
sweat or other electric resistance heaters must be operational 
during the entirety of the test procedure. Units with a user-
selectable setting must have the heaters energized and set to the 
most energy-consumptive position. Units featuring an automatic, non-
user-adjustable controller that turns on or off based on 
environmental conditions must be operating in the automatic state. 
Units that are not shipped with a controller from the point of 
manufacture, but are intended to be used with a controller, must be 
equipped with an appropriate controller when tested.
    2.2.5.5. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps. All electric 
resistance condensate heaters and condensate pumps must be installed 
and operational during the test. Prior to the start of the test, 
including the 24 hour period used to determine temperature 
stabilization prior to the start of the test period, as described in 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section 7.2.2.2 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  431.293), the condensate pan must be dry. For the duration of 
the test, including the 24 hour time period necessary for 
temperature stabilization, allow any condensate moisture generated 
to accumulate in the pan. Do not manually add or remove water from 
the condensate pan at any time during the test. Any automatic 
controls that initiate the operation of the condensate pan heater or 
pump based on water level or ambient conditions must be enabled and 
operated in the automatic setting.
    2.2.5.6. Illuminated Temperature Displays. All illuminated 
temperature displays must be energized and operated during the test 
the same way they would be energized and operated during normal 
field operation, as recommended in manufacturer product literature, 
including manuals.
    2.2.5.7. Condenser Filters. Remove any nonpermanent filters 
provided to prevent particulates from blocking a model's condenser 
coil.
    2.2.5.8. Security Covers. Remove any devices used to secure the 
model from theft or tampering.
    2.2.5.9. General Purpose Outlets. During the test, do not 
connect any external load to any general purpose outlets available 
on a unit.
    2.2.5.10. Crankcase Heaters and Other Electric Resistance 
Heaters for Cold Weather. Crankcase heaters and other electric 
resistance heaters for cold weather must be operational during the 
test. If a control system, such as a thermostat or electronic 
controller, is used to modulate the operation of the heater, it must 
be activated during the test and operated in accordance with the 
manufacturer's instructions.
    2.2.6. Sampling and Recording of Data. Record the data listed in 
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  431.293), at least every 1 minute. For the purpose of this 
section, ``average beverage temperature,'' listed in section 7.2.2.3 
of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, means ``instantaneous average next-to-vend 
beverage temperature.''
    2.3. Determination of Daily Energy Consumption. In section 
7.2.3.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
431.293), the primary rated energy consumption per day (ED) shall be 
the energy measured during the vending mode test period and 
accessory low power mode test period, as specified in sections 2.2.3 
and 2.2.4 of this appendix, as applicable.
    2.3.1. Energy Consumption of Payment Mechanisms. Calculate the 
sum of:
    (a) The default payment mechanism energy consumption value from 
section 2.2.5.1 and
    (b) The primary rated energy consumption per day (ED), in kWh, 
and determined in accordance with the calculation procedure in 
section 7.2.3.1, ``Calculation of Daily Energy Consumption,'' of 
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293).
    2.3.2. Refrigeration Low Power Mode. For refrigerated bottled or 
canned beverage vending machines with a refrigeration low power 
mode, multiply the value determined in section 2.3.1 of this 
appendix by 0.97 to determine the daily energy consumption of the 
unit tested. For refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machines without a refrigeration low power mode, the value 
determined in section 2.3.1 is the daily energy consumption of the 
unit tested.
    2.3.2.1. Refrigeration Low Power Mode Validation Test Method. 
This test method is not required for the certification of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines. To verify 
the existence of a refrigeration low power mode, initiate the 
refrigeration low power mode in accordance with manufacturer 
instructions contained in product literature and manuals, after 
completion of the 6-hour low power mode test period. Continue 
recording all the data specified in section 2.2.6 of this appendix 
until existence of a refrigeration low power mode has been confirmed 
or denied. The refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending 
machine shall be deemed to have a refrigeration low power mode if 
either:
    (a) The following three requirements have been satisfied:
    (1) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature 
must reach at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average 
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as 
applicable, within 6 hours.
    (2) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature 
must be maintained at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated 
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as 
applicable, for at least 1 hour.
    (3) After the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage 
temperature is maintained at or above 4[emsp14][deg]F above the 
integrated average temperature or lowest application product 
temperature, as applicable, for at least 1 hour, the refrigerated 
beverage vending machine must return to the specified integrated 
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as 
applicable, automatically without direct physical intervention.
    (b) Or, the compressor does not cycle on for the entire 6 hour 
period, in which case the instantaneous average beverage temperature 
does not have to reach 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average 
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as 
applicable, but, the equipment must still automatically return to 
the integrated average temperature or lowest application product 
temperature, as applicable, after the 6 hour period without direct 
physical intervention.

[[Page 45800]]

    2.3.3. Calculations and Rounding. In all cases, the primary 
rated energy consumption per day (ED) must be calculated 
with raw measured values and the final result rounded to units of 
0.01 kWh/day.
    3. Determination of Refrigeration Volume, Vendible Capacity, and 
Surface Area.
    3.1. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the ``refrigerated volume'' 
of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in 
accordance with Appendix C, ``Measurement of Volume,'' of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  431.293). For 
combination vending machines, the ``refrigerated volume'' does not 
include any non-refrigerated compartment(s).
    3.2. Vendible Capacity. Determine the ``vendible capacity'' of 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in 
accordance with the first paragraph of section 5, ``Vending Machine 
Capacity,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  431.293). For combination vending machines, the ``vendible 
capacity'' includes only the capacity of any portion of the 
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is 
refrigerated and does not include the capacity of the non-
refrigerated compartment(s).
    3.3. Determination of Surface Area. Note: This section is not 
required for the certification of refrigerated bottled or canned 
beverage vending machines. Determine the surface area of each 
beverage vending machine as the length multiplied by the height of 
outermost surface of the beverage vending machine cabinet, measured 
from edge to edge excluding any legs or other protrusions that 
extend beyond the dimensions of the primary cabinet. Determine the 
transparent and non-transparent areas on each side of a beverage 
vending machine as the total surface area of material that is 
transparent or is not transparent, respectively.

[FR Doc. 2015-17967 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P