[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 23, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35484-35509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15208]
[[Page 35483]]
Vol. 84
Tuesday,
No. 141
July 23, 2019
Part III
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Parts 429 and 430
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Clothes Dryers;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 84 , No. 141 / Tuesday, July 23, 2019 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 35484]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 430
[EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034]
RIN 1904-AD46
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Clothes Dryers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and announcement of public
meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') proposes to amend the
test procedures for clothes dryers to provide additional direction in
response to questions from manufacturers and test laboratories. DOE
also proposes amendments to specify rounding requirements for all
reported values; apply consistent use of nomenclature and correct
typographical errors; and remove obsolete sections of the test
procedures, including appendix D. DOE also seeks feedback from
interested parties on issues such as consumer usage patterns and
``connected'' clothes dryer features. As part of this proposal, DOE is
announcing a public meeting to solicit comments and data on its
proposal. DOE also welcomes comment on changes to the test procedure to
ensure that the test procedure measures the energy use of the clothes
dryer during a representative average use cycle or period of use, and
is not unduly burdensome to conduct.
DATES: Comments: Comments and information regarding this notice of
proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') will be accepted no later than September
23, 2019. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' for details. DOE
will hold a public meeting on this proposed test procedure if one is
requested by August 6, 2019.
Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on Wednesday, August 14, from
10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' for
webinar registration information, participant instructions, and
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.
If no participants register for the webinar then it will be cancelled.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments, identified by ``Test Procedure NOPR for
Clothes Dryers'' and by docket number EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034 and/or the
regulatory information number (``RIN'') 1904-AD46, by any of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
(2) Email: [email protected]. Include the docket
number EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034 and/or RIN 1904-AD46 in the subject line of
the message.
(3) Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
(4) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202)
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on participating in the public meeting, submitting written
comments, and additional information on the rulemaking process, see
section V of this document.
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.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.
The docket web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034. The docket web page contains simple
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section V of this document for information on how to
submit comments through http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bryan Berringer, 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) 586-0371. Email:
[email protected].
Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-7796. Email: [email protected].
For further information on how to submit a comment, review other
public comments and the docket, or regarding a public meeting, contact
the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445
or by email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Rulemaking History
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Coverage
B. Consumer Usage Patterns and Capabilities
1. Test Load Composition
2. Test Load Size
3. Test Cycle Selections
4. Remaining Moisture Content
5. Annual Drying Cycles and Hours Per Year
6. DOE Response to Comments
C. Other Comments
1. Energy Use Metric
2. Effects of Clothes Dryers on Heating, Ventilation, and Air
Conditioning Energy Use
3. Washer-Dryer Test Procedure
D. ``Connected'' Clothes Dryers
E. Maintaining Hourly Btu Rating for Gas Clothes Dryers
F. Inactive and Off Mode Power Measurements
G. Final RMC Requirements for Automatic Termination Control
Dryers
H. Dryness Level Selection for Automatic Termination Control
Dryers
I. General Test Procedure Provisions at 10 CFR 430.23(d)
J. Rounding Requirements for Reported Values
K. Formatting Changes and Typographical Errors
1. ``Conventional'' and ``Vented'' Nomenclature
2. Symbol Definitions
3. Removal of Duplicate Instructions for Test Load Preparation
4. Typographical Errors
5. Removal of Obsolete Provisions
L. Removing Obsolete Appendix D
M. Compliance Date
N. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization, and Other Topics
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
3. Other Test Procedure Topics
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Order 13771 and 13777
[[Page 35485]]
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
G. Review Under Executive Order 12988
H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
J. Review Under Executive Order 12630
K. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
B. Submission of Comments
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Clothes dryers are included in the list of ``covered products'' for
which DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation
standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(8)) The current DOE
test procedures for clothes dryers appear at title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (``CFR'') part 430, subpart B, appendix D1 and
appendix D2 (``appendix D1'' and ``appendix D2''). The following
sections discuss DOE's authority to establish and amend test procedures
for clothes dryers, as well as relevant background information
regarding DOE's proposed amendments to the test procedures for this
product.
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended
(``EPCA''),\1\ among other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part B \2\ of
EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products
Other Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions
designed to improve energy efficiency. These products include clothes
dryers, the subject of this NOPR. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(8))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018,
Public Law 115-270 (October 23, 2018).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists essentially
of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy
conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA specifically include
definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C.
6295), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C.
6294), and the authority to require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for
particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures
and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
The Federal 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 pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)),
and (2) making representations about the efficiency of those consumer
products (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test
procedures to determine whether the products comply with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
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 requires that any test procedures prescribed or
amended under this section be reasonably designed to produce test
results which measure energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use
cycle or period of use and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
In addition, EPCA requires that DOE amend its test procedures for
all covered products to integrate measures of standby mode and off mode
energy consumption. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) Standby mode and off
mode energy consumption must be incorporated into the overall energy
efficiency, energy consumption, or other energy descriptor for each
covered product unless the current test procedures already account for
and incorporate standby and off mode energy consumption or such
integration is technically infeasible. If an integrated test procedure
is technically infeasible, DOE must prescribe a separate standby mode
and off mode energy use test procedure for the covered product, if
technically feasible. (U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(ii)) Any such amendment
must consider the most current versions of the International
Electrotechnical Commission (``IEC'') Standard 62301 \3\ and IEC
Standard 62087 \4\ as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ IEC 62301, Household electrical appliances--Measurement of
standby power (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
\4\ IEC 62087, Methods of measurement for the power consumption
of audio, video, and related equipment (Edition 3.0, 2011-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it
must publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an
opportunity to present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(2)) EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE
evaluate test procedures for each type of covered product, including
clothes dryers, to determine whether amended test procedures would more
accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use
cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A)) If the Secretary
determines, on his own behalf or in response to a petition by any
interested person, that a test procedure should be prescribed or
amended, the Secretary shall promptly publish in the Federal Register
proposed test procedures and afford interested persons an opportunity
to present oral and written data, views, and arguments with respect to
such procedures. The comment period on a proposed rule to amend a test
procedure shall be at least 60 days and may not exceed 270 days. In
prescribing or amending a test procedure, the Secretary shall take into
account such information as the Secretary determines relevant to such
procedure, including technological developments relating to energy use
or energy efficiency of the type (or class) of covered products
involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)). If DOE determines that test procedure
revisions are not appropriate, DOE must publish its determination not
to amend the test procedures. DOE is publishing this NOPR in
satisfaction of the 7-year review requirement specified in EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
B. Rulemaking History
DOE's existing test procedures for clothes dryers appear at
appendix D1 and appendix D2. Manufacturers may use either appendix D1
or appendix D2 to show compliance with the applicable energy
conservation standards, and must use a single appendix for all
representations, including certifications of compliance.
[[Page 35486]]
DOE originally established the test procedure for clothes dryers at
appendix D in a final rule published in the Federal Register on
September 14, 1977. 42 FR 46145. On May 19, 1981, DOE published a final
rule to amend the test procedure by establishing a field use factor \5\
for clothes dryers with automatic termination controls, clarifying the
test cloth specifications and clothes dryer preconditioning, and making
editorial and minor technical changes. 46 FR 27324. The test procedure
included provisions for determining the energy factor (``EF'') for
clothes dryers, which is a measure of the total energy required to dry
a standard test load of laundry to a ``bone dry'' \6\[thinsp]state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Per-cycle energy consumption is multiplied by the field use
factor to account for consumers over-drying loads beyond the final
remaining moisture content required in the test procedure.
\6\ ``Bone dry'' refers to a condition of a load of test cloths
in which the change in weight of the load is 1 percent or less after
two successive 10-minute drying periods. See section 1.5 of appendix
D1 and section 1.6 of appendix D2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 6, 2011, DOE published in the Federal Register a final
rule for the clothes dryer and room air conditioner test procedure
rulemaking (the ``January 2011 final rule''), in which it (1) adopted
provisions for the measurement of standby mode and off mode energy use
for those products along with a new energy efficiency metric for
clothes dryers, combined energy factor (``CEF''), which incorporates
energy use in active mode, standby mode, and off mode; and (2) adopted
several amendments to the clothes dryer and room air conditioner test
procedures concerning the active mode for these products. DOE created a
new appendix D1 in 10 CFR part 430 subpart B that contained the amended
test procedure for clothes dryers. 76 FR 972.
DOE published a final rule on August 14, 2013 (the ``August 2013
Final Rule''), amending the clothes dryer test procedure, in which it
(1) amended appendix D1 to update the reference to the latest edition
of IEC Standard 62301, ``Household electrical appliances-Measurement of
standby power,'' Edition 2.0 2011-01 \7\ (``IEC Standard 62301''); (2)
amended appendix D and appendix D1 to clarify the cycle settings used
for the test cycle, the requirements for the gas supply for gas clothes
dryers, the installation conditions for console lights, the method for
measuring the drum capacity, the maximum allowable weighing scale
range, and the allowable use of a relative humidity meter; and (3)
established a new appendix D2 that includes procedures reflecting the
amendments discussed above as well as testing methods for measuring the
effects of automatic cycle termination. 78 FR 49608. Manufacturers must
use the test procedures in either appendix D1 or appendix D2 to
demonstrate compliance with the current energy conservation standards
for clothes dryers. Manufacturers must use a single appendix for all
representations for a given model, including certifications of
compliance, and may not use appendix D1 for certain representations and
appendix D2 for other representations for that model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ IEC Standard 62301 is available online at https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/6789.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE published a notice of public meeting (``NOPM'') on October 23,
2014 (the ``October 2014 NOPM'') and held the public meeting on
November 13, 2014 to facilitate a discussion among interested parties
about potential changes to the DOE clothes dryer test procedures to
produce test results that measure energy use during a representative
average use cycle without being unduly burdensome to conduct.\8\ 79 FR
63336.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A transcript of the public meeting and submitted comments
are available in the docket for this rulemaking and can be accessed
at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
In this NOPR, DOE proposes to amend appendix D1 and appendix D2,
both entitled ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy
Consumption of Clothes Dryers,'' to provide additional detail in
response to questions from manufacturers and test laboratories,
including additional detail regarding the procedures for maintaining
the required heat input rate for gas clothes dryers; additional detail
for the test procedures for performing inactive and off mode power
measurements; and specifications for the final remaining moisture
content (``RMC'') required for testing automatic termination control
dryers. In addition, DOE proposes amendments to provide further
direction for additional provisions within the test procedures; specify
rounding requirements for all reported values; apply consistent use of
nomenclature and correct typographical errors; and remove obsolete
sections of the test procedures, including appendix D. DOE also seeks
feedback from interested parties on issues such as consumer usage
patterns and ``connected'' clothes dryer features.
DOE has initially determined that the proposed amendments for
appendix D1 and appendix D2 described in section III of this document
would not alter the measured efficiency of clothes dryers.
DOE's proposed actions are summarized in Table II.1 and addressed
in detail in section III of this notice of proposed rulemaking.
Table II.1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test Procedure Relative to
Current Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed test
Current DOE test procedure procedure Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provides adjustments that can Specifies the order of Response to test
be made to maintain the adjustment, from laboratory
required heat input rate for least burdensome to question.
gas clothes dryers. most burdensome, for
adjustments that can
be made to maintain
the required heat
input rate for gas
clothes dryers.
Requires distinction between Provides simpler, Response to test
standby mode and off mode clearer procedures laboratory
based on control panel for measuring the low- comment.
functionality that may not be power modes of a
readily apparent to a third- clothes dryer based
party tester. on observable
characteristics of
the controls.
Does not explicitly provide Specifies that the Response to
the RMC requirement for requirement to industry
subsequent test runs if the achieve a final comment.
prior run was deemed invalid. dryness level of 2
percent or less also
applies to any
subsequent run, if
required.
Silent on selection of the Seeks comment on Response to test
middle dryness level setting whether to specify laboratory
for clothes dryers with an use of next-highest comment.
even number of settings. setting above or next-
lowest setting below
the midpoint if an
even number of
discrete settings are
provided.
[[Page 35487]]
Does not include instructions Adds instructions for To provide
for calculating annual calculating annual consistency
operating cost, CEF, and operating cost and between
other measures for clothes CEF using appendix appendices D1
dryers optionally tested D2; adds annual and D2.
using appendix D2; does not energy consumption
include a calculation for calculation using
annual energy consumption. either appendix D1 or
D2.
Does not specify rounding Specifies rounding To further
requirements for reported requirements for all specify
values. reported values. reporting
requirements.
Contains nomenclature and Applies consistent use To improve
formatting inconsistencies of nomenclature, accuracy and
and typographical errors. improves formatting, readability.
and fixes
typographical errors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the
following standards from the Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers (``AHAM'') and IEC for incorporation by reference into
appendix D1 and appendix D2: AHAM HLD-1-2009, ``Household Tumble Type
Clothes Dryers'', and IEC 62301, ``Household electrical appliances--
Measurement of standby power'', (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Coverage
The proposed amendments to DOE's clothes dryer test procedures
discussed in this NOPR cover both electric and gas clothes dryers. DOE
regulations define ``electric clothes dryer'' and ``gas clothes dryer''
similarly as a cabinet-like appliance designed to dry fabrics in a
tumble-type drum with forced air circulation, with blower(s) driven by
an electric motor(s) and either electricity or gas, respectively, as
the heat source. 10 CFR 430.2. This NOPR does not propose any changes
to the scope of applicability of DOE's clothes dryer test procedures.
B. Consumer Usage Patterns and Capabilities
As discussed in section I.B of this document, DOE requested comment
as part of the October 2014 NOPM on potential changes to the DOE
clothes dryer test procedures to produce test results that would better
measure energy use during a representative average use cycle without
being unduly burdensome to conduct. In response to the October 2014
NOPM, DOE received a number of comments regarding potential test
procedure changes to reflect current consumer usage patterns and
capabilities.
Efficiency advocates and utilities stated that DOE should
investigate changes to the clothes dryer test procedure to better
represent consumer use. (Ecova,\9\ Public Meeting Transcript, No. 9 at
p. 18; \10\ Joint Efficiency Advocates,\11\ No. 5 at pp. 1-2; \12\
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (``NEEA'') and Northwest Power and
Conservation Council (``NPCC''), No. 10 at pp. 2, 8; Pacific Gas and
Electric Company (``PG&E'') No. 7 at pp. 1-2; Southern California
Edison (``SCE''), No. 11 at pp. 1-2; Super Efficient Dryer Initiative
(``SEDI''), No. 6 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Representing the California Investor Owned Utilities.
\10\ A notation in the form ``Ecova, Public Meeting Transcript,
No. 9 at p. 18'' identifies an oral comment that DOE received on
November 13, 2014 during the public meeting, and was recorded in the
public meeting transcript in the docket for this test procedure
rulemaking (Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034). This particular
notation refers to a comment (1) made by Ecova during the public
meeting; (2) recorded in document number 9, which is the public
meeting transcript that is filed in the docket of this test
procedure rulemaking; and (3) which appears on page 18 of document
number 9.
\11\ The Joint Efficiency Advocates are the Appliance Standards
Awareness Project, Alliance to Save Energy, American Council for an
Energy-Efficient Economy, Consumer Federation of America, Natural
Resources Defense Council, and Northeast Energy Efficiency
Partnerships.
\12\ A notation in the form ``Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5
at pp. 1-2'' identifies a written comment: (1) made by the Joint
Efficiency Advocates; (2) recorded in document number 5 that is
filed in the docket of this test procedure rulemaking (Docket No.
EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034) and available for review at http://www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on pages 1 through 2 of
document number 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEEA, NPCC, PG&E, and SCE commented that, based on their testing,
clothes dryer performance under simulated ``real-world'' conditions is
significantly different compared to tests conducted according to
appendix D2. NEEA, NPCC, PG&E, and SCE also claimed that the relative
ranking of efficiency for models in a given product category is
different when tested using what they identified as real-world test
conditions as compared to the current appendix D2. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10
at p. 2; PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 3, 11; SCE, No. 11 at pp. 3, 11) Efficiency
advocates and utilities stated that DOE should conduct a sufficient
amount of testing to support the development of a test procedure that
they believe would minimize testing burden, produce certified
performance ratings that reasonably align with expected field
performance, and produce appropriate relative performance rankings.
(SEDI, No. 6 at pp. 2-3; NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 6; PG&E, No. 7 at p.
2; SCE, No. 11 at p. 2) The Joint Efficiency Advocates, NEEA and NPCC
also commented that a more representative test procedure would result
in more energy savings in the field by more accurately capturing the
benefits of new technologies that could improve clothes dryer
efficiency. (Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at pp. 1-2; NEEA & NPCC,
No. 10 at p. 8) As discussed in the following sections, efficiency
advocates and utilities identified factors related to consumer usage,
such as test load composition, test load size, and test cycle settings,
that they stated account for differences between measured field
performance and test results obtained using appendix D2.
Conversely, manufacturers commented that DOE should maintain the
current test procedure because they stated it ensures the repeatability
and reproducibility of test results. (General Electric Appliances
(``GE''), No. 3 at p. 1; AHAM, No. 4 at p. 2; Samsung Electronics
America, Inc. (``Samsung''), No. 8 at p. 2) AHAM expressed concern that
attempts to adopt test load conditions intending to more accurately
reflect consumer loads would impact the repeatability and
reproducibility of the test procedure. (AHAM, No. 4 at p. 2) Samsung
stated that it has found it impossible to obtain repeatable and
reproducible test results with a ``real-world'' test load. (Samsung,
No. 8 at p. 2)
The following sections discuss these issues related to specific
testing conditions in the DOE clothes dryer test procedure. Note that
DOE also recently issued an RFI to seek more information on whether its
test procedures are reasonably designed, as required by EPCA, to
produce results that measure the energy use or efficiency of a product
during a representative average use cycle or period of use. 84 FR 9721
(Mar. 18, 2019). DOE seeks comment on this
[[Page 35488]]
issue as it pertains to the test procedure for clothes dryers.
1. Test Load Composition
Section 2.6 of appendix D1 and appendix D2 specify a test load
composed of a pure finished bleached cloth, made with a momie or
granite weave, which is a blended fabric of 50-percent cotton and 50-
percent polyester. The ``energy test cloth'' is made from material that
is 24 inches by 36 inches, hemmed to 22 inches by 34 inches, and weighs
within 10 percent of 5.75 ounces per square yard. Smaller ``energy
stuffer cloths'' are made of material that is 12 inches by 12 inches,
hemmed to 10 inches by 10 inches.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The test procedure specifies that the energy stuffer cloths
are to be used to adjust the test load to achieve the proper weight,
but that no more than five stuffer cloths may be added per test
load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the DOE test procedure clothing load, several
industry test procedures specify clothing loads for measuring the
drying performance of clothes dryers. American National Standards
Institute (``ANSI'')/AHAM's test procedure, HLD-1-2010, ``Household
Tumble Type Clothes Dryers'' (``ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010'') specifies the
use of 100-percent cotton bed sheets, towels, and pillowcases. The
bedsheets and pillowcases are plain weave linen, while the towels are
huckaback weave. IEC Standard 61121, Edition 4.0 2012-02, ``Tumble
dryers for household use--Methods for measuring the performance''
(``IEC Standard 61121'') incorporates by reference from IEC's consumer
clothes washer test procedure two different test loads: (1) The
``Cotton test load,'' which comprises 100-percent cotton bed sheets,
towels, and pillowcases consistent with ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010; and (2)
the ``Synthetics/blends test load,'' which comprises pillowcases and
buttoned men's shirts fabricated from plain weave 35-percent cotton and
65-percent polyester fabric.
Efficiency advocates and utilities urged DOE to investigate the use
of a test load or test loads that more closely resemble real-world
clothing, including the test load and test methods specified in the
``Utility Test Protocol'' developed by NEEA and the California
Investor-Owned Utilities (``IOUs''). (Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5
at p. 2; NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 9 at pp. 31, 32-33; NEEA
& NPCC, No. 10 at pp. 2, 4; PG&E, No. 7 at p. 13; SEDI, No. 6 at p. 2;
SCE, No. 11 at p. 13) PG&E and SCE stated that the Utility Test
Protocol is an investigative test method that was developed based on
data collected as part of the field study conducted by NEEA in 2012
\14\ and is aimed at producing energy use measurements that are more
representative of real-world use. PG&E and SCE noted that the Utility
Test Protocol consists of one test using the current appendix D2 test
procedure and four supplemental tests that use a range of test load
compositions, test load sizes, and cycle settings.\15\ PG&E and SCE
stated that the aim of the Utility Test Protocol is to develop a test
procedure that better represents real-world conditions while also
minimizing test burden to the extent possible and providing repeatable
results. (PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 2-3, 12; SCE, No. 11 at pp. 2-3, 12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The NEEA field study report can be found in the docket for
this rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2014-BT-TP-0034-0010.
\15\ The ``Utility Test Protocol'' consists of a series of five
tests: (1) Using the current appendix D2 test method; (2) using a
4.22-pound real-world load with the medium temperature setting and
eco mode deactivated; (3) using a 16.9-pound real-world load with
the medium temperature setting and eco mode deactivated; (4) using
an 8.45-pound real-world load using the most efficient setting
configuration possible; and (5) using an 8.45-pound real-world load
using settings that achieves the fastest rate of drying possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency advocates commented that DOE should also consider the
clothing load defined in AHAM HLD-1-1992, ``Household Tumble Type
Clothes Dryers,'' as a more realistic test load.\16\ (Ecova, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 9 at p. 18; Jonathan Gatzke, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 9 at p. 48; Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at p. 2;
SEDI, No. 6 at p. 2; NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The AHAM 1992 test load consists of 100% cotton items
intended to represent clothes items regularly laundered, and
includes sheets, tablecloths, shirts, bath towels, t-shirts,
pillowcases, shorts, wash cloths, and handkerchiefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEEA and NPCC commented that, based on their testing, there is a 12
to 15-percent gap between tested energy consumption using appendix D2
and energy consumption observed in the NEEA field study. According to
NEEA and NPCC, this discrepancy is due to the composition of the DOE
test load, which they stated is representative of an unspecified
fraction of the loads dried in typical households. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10
at p. 2) NEEA and NPCC added that loads of heavier fabric for any given
load size took longer to dry and, as a result, used more energy in
their testing than loads consisting of the DOE test cloth. (NEEA &
NPCC, No. 10 at p. 3) NEEA, NPCC, PG&E and SCE also commented that
hybrid heat pump clothes dryers (i.e., clothes dryers that use a heat
pump along with a supplemental electric resistance heater) are more
impacted based on their testing by the use of ``real-world'' test loads
and have only marginally better efficiency than conventional clothes
dryers when measured using the Utility Test Protocol. (NEEA & NPCC, No.
10 at p. 3; PG&E, No. 7 at p. 3; SCE, No. 11 at p. 3) PG&E and SCE
noted that, based on their testing with the small, medium, and large
``real-world'' test loads, the hybrid heat pumps had lower measured
efficiencies in some cases than several conventional electric clothes
dryers. PG&E and SCE expressed concerned that these results may
indicate that hybrid heat pump clothes dryers achieve no energy savings
for consumers in practice. (PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 7-10; SCE, No. 11 at pp.
7-10)
Efficiency advocates and utilities commented that testing conducted
by NEEA and the California IOUs showed that the test-to-test variation
was often lower for the supplemental tests under their Utility Test
Protocol using clothing test loads they claimed to be more
representative of consumer use than when using the current DOE test
load, ranging from 2.3 percent to 5.4 percent for their clothing test
loads, compared to 5.1 percent for the current DOE test load.
Efficiency advocates and utilities concluded that, based on this
testing, a test load that they believe is more representative of
consumer use would not introduce an unacceptable level of test-to-test
variability in the certification process. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 4)
Efficiency advocates and utilities also noted that using a weighted
average of multiple tests, as with the Utility Test Protocol, reduces
variability in test results compared to the single test specified in
appendix D2. (Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3; NEEA, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 9 at pp. 62, 68; NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 4;
PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 11-12; SCE, No. 11 at pp. 11-12) PG&E and SCE added
that they did not yet have data on the reproducibility of results
obtained using the test load specified in their Utility Test Protocol,
and that DOE should conduct additional testing using this test method
to assess reproducibility. (PG&E, No. 7 at p. 12; SCE, No. 11 at p. 12)
The Joint Efficiency Advocates also encouraged DOE to consider how the
certification and enforcement provisions could be amended to avoid
repeatability and reproducibility concerns in an improved test
procedure. (Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 10 at p. 4)
AHAM and GE stated that it is critical to have a test procedure
that produces repeatable and reproducible results. AHAM and GE
expressed support for the continued use of the current DOE test load
and noted that more than a
[[Page 35489]]
decade has been spent developing the DOE test load, which has been
demonstrated to yield results that are repeatable and reproducible.
AHAM and GE commented that developing a ``real-world'' test load that
produces repeatable and reproducible results is not feasible. (AHAM,
No. 4 at p. 2; GE, No. 3 at p. 1) AHAM and GE stated that the studies
conducted by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (``ORNL'') \17\ and Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory (``PNNL'') 18 19 showed that
use of the current DOE test load produces repeatable results and is a
good predictor of relative performance with other clothing loads, while
the repeatability of test results decreases when the load composition
is less uniform (i.e., contains different fabrics and varying
thicknesses). (AHAM, No. 4 at p. 2; GE, No. 3 at p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ K. Gluesenkamp. Residential Clothes Dryer Performance Under
Timed and Automatic Cycle Termination Test Procedures. 2014. Oak
Ridge National Laboratory. Report No. ORNL/TM-2014/431. http://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/docs/2014-10-09-ORNL-DryerFinalReport-TM-2014-431.pdf.
\18\ W. TeGrotenhuis. Clothes Dryer Automatic Termination Sensor
Evaluation. Volume 1: Characterization of Energy Use in Residential
Clothes Dryers. 2014. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Report
No. PNNL-23621. http://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-23621.pdf.
\19\ W. TeGrotenhuis. Clothes Dryer Automatic Termination Sensor
Evaluation. Volume 2: Improved Sensor and Control Designs. 2014.
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Report No. PNNL-23616. http://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-23616.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Samsung similarly supported the continued use of the DOE test load
to minimize measurement uncertainty and stated that it is not possible
to obtain repeatable and reproducible test results with a ``real-
world'' test load. Samsung suggested that DOE consider results from the
IEC technical subcommittee 59D working group, which is developing an
alternate test load that is based on DOE test cloth material but
includes differently sized items to better represent ``real-world''
conditions while maintaining reproducibility. (Samsung, No. 8 at p. 2)
2. Test Load Size
Section 2.7 of appendix D1 and appendix D2 specify a test load
weight of 8.45 pounds [hairsp].085 pounds for standard-
sized clothes dryers (i.e., with a drum capacity of 4.4 cubic feet or
greater) and a test load weight of 3 pounds [hairsp].03
pounds for compact-sized clothes dryers (i.e., with a drum capacity of
less than 4.4 cubic feet).
ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010 and IEC Standard 61121 provide a range of test
load sizes, with specifications for the number of test articles within
each load for a given load size (and, for IEC Standard 61121, for the
selected load composition). ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010 specifies that a
clothes dryer may be tested using loads of any or all sizes. IEC
Standard 61121 requires the selection of load size according to the
manufacturer's rating of the capacity of the unit.
NEEA and NPCC commented that although the average clothes dryer
load size observed in the NEEA field study was reasonably close to the
8.45-pound test load currently specified in appendix D1 and appendix
D2, this load size constituted only a small fraction (less than 15
percent) of all loads dried in the NEEA field study and there were a
significant number of smaller loads dried by consumers in the NEEA
field study data. NEEA and NPCC also stated that the load size has a
significant impact on the measured efficiency under the Utility Test
Protocol. According to NEEA and NPCC, the measured efficiency under the
Utility Test Protocol for conventional clothes dryers using small loads
of clothing, as opposed to test cloths, was about half of the measured
efficiency for large loads of the same clothing. NEEA and NPCC
commented that DOE should require testing with at least one small load
in addition to the current load size and weighting the results to
calculate CEF. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at pp. 2, 4-5)
The Joint Efficiency Advocates, PG&E, SEDI, and SCE supported the
investigation of additional smaller and larger test load sizes to
reflect the findings of the NEEA field study and not discourage
technologies that could improve the efficiency of drying different
loads sizes. (Ecova, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 9 at pp. 122-123;
Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at p. 2; PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 3, 13;
SEDI, No. 6 at p. 2; SCE, No. 11 at pp. 3, 13) PG&E and SCE commented
that the Utility Test Protocol, which was developed based on the NEEA
field study data, specifies testing of a smaller 4.22-pound load and a
larger 16.9-pound load, in addition to the existing 8.45-pound load for
standard-size clothes dryers. (PG&E, No. 7 at p. 3; SCE, No. 11 at p.
3) Referencing the NEEA field study, Samsung similarly commented that
DOE should consider adding a small load size to the test procedure to
better represent consumer behavior. (Samsung, No. 8 at p. 2)
SEDI also commented that testing has shown that heat pump clothes
dryers demonstrate improved efficiency when drying larger loads. (SEDI,
No. 6 at p. 2) SEDI commented that DOE should include heat pump and
hybrid heat pump clothes dryers in its investigative testing to ensure
that the test procedure accurately assesses the performance of these
new technologies, in particular when drying larger laundry loads.
(SEDI, No. 6 at pp. 2, 3)
3. Test Cycle Selections
Section 3.3.2 of appendix D2 specifies that for automatic
termination control dryers, the ``normal'' program shall be selected
for the test cycle. For clothes dryers that do not have a ``normal''
program, the cycle recommended by the manufacturer for drying cotton or
linen shall be selected. Id. If the drying temperature setting can be
chosen independently of the program, it shall be set to the maximum.
Id. If the dryness level setting can be chosen independently of the
program, it shall be set to the ``normal'' or ``medium'' dryness level
setting. Id. After the completion of the test cycle, the test load is
removed and weighed. If the final moisture content is greater than 2
percent, the test is considered invalid and a new run shall be
conducted using the highest dryness level setting. Id.
Industry standards address cycle selection differently from the DOE
test procedure. ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010 specifies that the test cycle be
run using the maximum temperature setting without allowing the clothes
dryer to advance into the cool down period. If the required final
moisture content (6 percent) cannot be met using this setting, a new
test run must be conducted using a different user-selected setting that
will achieve the target final moisture content. IEC Standard 61121
requires that the test cycle for a given load composition be run using
the cycle program and settings specified in the manufacturer's
instructions to achieve a target final moisture content, which is based
on the test load composition. In the absence of any instructions from
the manufacturer, or if the specified cycle program and settings do not
achieve the required final moisture content, then the test shall be run
using a user-selected combination of cycle program and settings that
will achieve the required final moisture content.
NEEA and NPCC stated that because of the increasing use of clothes
dryers with electronic controls and the proliferation of cycle options
on many models, it will be difficult to define what cycles should be
used with each test load composition and size to determine a CEF rating
that is representative of consumer use. NEEA and NPCC commented that,
based on the NEEA field study data, consumers only use two or three
cycle programs for the vast majority of clothes dryer loads.
[[Page 35490]]
According to NEEA and NPCC, consumers choose a cycle program based on
the size and composition of the load being dried. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10
at pp. 2, 5)
Additionally, NEEA and NPCC commented that the NEEA field study
data shows that the medium or low temperature settings are used for
57.5 percent of consumer drying cycles, with the medium temperature
setting accounting for 46 percent of cycles, regardless of the cycle
program. Thus, NEEA and NPCC stated that the test procedure should
require at least one additional test cycle using a medium temperature
setting. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 7)
NEEA and NPCC stated that clothes dryer energy use is significantly
different for a cycle with a ``normal'' dryness level setting than one
with a ``more dry'' dryness level setting, with all other settings the
same. According to NEEA and NPCC, this suggests that clothes dryers
will behave very differently when drying loads of heavy fabrics where
the ``more dry'' dryness level setting is necessary compared to drying
the DOE test load using the ``normal'' dryness level setting. (NEEA &
NPCC, No. 10 at pp. 5-6)
NEEA and NPCC commented that there may be a relatively small
combination of cycle selections and load compositions/sizes that would
fully represent the entire range of annual consumer use. NEEA and NPCC
added that they will continue to conduct testing and field studies and
urged DOE to conduct testing as well to determine appropriate cycle
selections for the test procedure. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 6) As
discussed in section III.B.1 of this document, PG&E and SCE commented
that the Utility Test Protocol, which was developed based on the NEEA
field study data, includes testing with a variety of cycle selections
and corresponding load sizes and compositions. (PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 3,
25-27; SCE, No. 11 at pp. 3, 25-27)
The Joint Efficiency Advocates and SEDI similarly commented that it
will be important for the test procedure to require testing of multiple
cycle selections as clothes dryers continue to offer an increasing
number of cycle options that can significantly impact energy
consumption and performance. (Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at p.
2; SEDI, No. 6 at p. 3) The Joint Efficiency Advocates added that
testing with only a single cycle program could allow for test procedure
circumvention, noting that a clothes dryer could be designed with a
``normal'' program that has a very long cycle time that many consumers
would never select over a cycle program with a shorter cycle time. The
Joint Efficiency Advocates encouraged DOE to measure and report the
cycle time for each clothes dryer it tests in each of the cycles
tested, and to use this data to develop an efficiency calculation that
properly weights the results from each of the tested cycle selections.
(Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at p. 2)
NEEA and NPCC also commented that there has been a proliferation of
models with an ``eco mode'' setting offered by most manufacturers, but
that eco mode may operate differently for different manufacturers.
(NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 5) PG&E and SCE stated that cycles using eco
mode can be up to three times longer than the ``normal'' program
without eco mode. (PG&E, No. 7 at p. 3; SCE No. 11 at p. 3) PG&E and
SCE added that although an eco mode may be activated by default in the
as-shipped condition, many consumers may easily disable it. (Id.) The
Joint Efficiency Advocates encouraged DOE to develop a test procedure
that would incentivize clothes dryer designs that make it more likely
for consumers to use an eco mode. (Joint Efficiency Advocates, No. 5 at
p. 3) The Joint Efficiency Advocates referenced two heat pump clothes
dryers that have received the ENERGY STAR Emerging Technology Award,
and that have efficiency ratings in their most efficient setting that
are 29 percent and 13 percent higher than the efficiency ratings using
the ``normal'' cycle program. (Id.) The Joint Efficiency Advocates
stated that, as a result, energy savings associated with new clothes
dryer technologies will be highly dependent on the cycle programs and
settings that consumers select. (Id.)
Conversely, manufacturers recommended that DOE maintain the
existing test cycle selections. Whirlpool Corporation (``Whirlpool'')
stated that its own data indicate that consumers primarily use the
``normal'' cycle program. (Whirlpool, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 9
at p. 110) AHAM commented that there are no comprehensive data
available to accurately gauge consumer behavior in terms of drying
cycle selections. (AHAM, No. 4 at p. 3) GE also commented that it is
not aware of any studies that categorically demonstrate that certain
cycle selections will more accurately represent consumer usage across
all demographics. (GE, No. 3 at p. 2) AHAM and GE both commented that
the current DOE test procedure represents the upper limits of energy
consumption by requiring use of the maximum temperature setting. (AHAM,
No. 4 at pp. 2-3; GE, No. 3 at p. 2) AHAM stated that additional tests
should not be required until there is a better understanding of
consumer usage patterns and cycle selections to avoid burdensome
testing and costs that would ultimately be passed on to the consumer.
(AHAM, No. 4 at p. 3)
4. Remaining Moisture Content
In response to the October 2014 NOPM, DOE received comments on the
initial RMC specifications in appendix D2. Sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 of
appendix D2 specify that the initial RMC of a test load for a compact-
size and standard-size clothes dryer, respectively, must be 57.5
percent [hairsp]0.33 percent. To achieve the required RMC,
the test procedure specifies that the test load be dampened by
agitating in water whose temperature is 60 degrees Fahrenheit
(``[deg]F'') [hairsp]5 [deg]F and consists of 0 to 17 parts
per million hardness for approximately 2 minutes to saturate the
fabric. Id. The water is then extracted from the load by spinning until
the RMC is between 52.5 and 57.5 percent of the bone-dry weight of the
test load. Id. Final mass adjustments to achieve the specified initial
RMC must be made by uniformly adding water to each test cloth using a
spray bottle. Id.
SEDI encouraged DOE to investigate the initial RMC associated with
clothes washers to more closely reflect the RMC found in ``real-world''
washing conditions. (SEDI, No. 6 at p. 3) SEDI stated that this would
avoid double-counting the energy consumption and savings associated
with the clothes washer and clothes dryer. (Id.) NEEA and NPCC
commented that the NEEA field study data showed that different load
compositions had different levels of RMC at the end of the washing
cycle, which corresponds to the clothes dryer initial RMC. (NEEA &
NPCC, No. 10 at p. 6) For example, NEEA and NPCC stated, loads with
heavier fabrics had higher initial RMCs going into the clothes dryer
than a load of the same size but made of lighter fabrics. (Id.) NEEA
and NPCC stated that if DOE adopts the use of different test load
compositions, the initial RMC should be different (i.e., a higher
initial RMC for heavier fabrics) than the initial RMC used for the
current DOE test load. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 6) PG&E and SCE
commented that the Utility Test Protocol, which was developed based on
the NEEA field study data, specifies an initial RMC of 62 percent for
the supplemental tests using a ``real-world'' test load. (PG&E, No. 7
at pp. 3, 24; SCE, No. 11 at pp. 3, 24)
DOE also received comments, which are discussed in the following
section, regarding the final RMC specifications in appendix D2. Section
3.3.1 of appendix D2 specifies that for timer
[[Page 35491]]
dryers, the test load is dried until the final RMC is between 1 and 2.5
percent of the bone-dry weight of the test load. The measured energy
consumption is then normalized to determine the energy consumption
required to dry the test load to 2-percent RMC, with a field use factor
applied to account for the over-drying energy consumption. Id. For
automatic termination control dryers, section 3.3.2 of appendix D2
specifies that a test is considered valid if the final RMC of the test
load is less than 2 percent.
NEEA, NPCC, PG&E and SCE commented that the Utility Test Protocol
uses a final RMC of 4 percent for specific supplemental tests using a
``real-world'' test load, which was based on their laboratory
investigations, consumer acceptability testing, and consultations with
industry. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 6; PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 3, 25-27;
SCE, No. 11 at pp. 3, 25-27) NEEA and NPCC added that the 4-percent
final RMC value for ``real-world'' loads is consistent with a 2-percent
final RMC for the current DOE test load when using the same automatic
cycle termination drying mode. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 6)
Samsung commented that requiring a final RMC of 2 percent or less
would tend to promote over-drying and unnecessary additional energy use
because clothes that are over-dried will typically absorb moisture from
ambient air and reach a final state of between 5-percent and 8-percent
RMC. (Samsung No. 8 at p. 1) Samsung stated that NEEA data suggest a
final RMC of about 5 percent, and the IEC standard estimates about an
8-percent moisture absorption from the ambient humidity. (Id.)
Accordingly, Samsung commented that DOE should consider changing the
target final RMC to 5 percent. (Samsung No. 8 at pp. 1-2)
5. Annual Drying Cycles and Hours per Year
Section 4.5 of appendix D1 and appendix D2 assume the
representative average use for clothes dryers is 283 drying cycles per
year. NEEA and NPCC commented that the data from the Energy Information
Administration (``EIA'') Residential Energy Consumption Survey
(``RECS'') used to develop DOE's current estimate for the number of
drying cycles per year exhibit a very wide variance. (NEEA & NPCC, No.
10 at p. 7) NEEA and NPCC stated while the data from the NEEA field
study may not be strictly representative of the entire United States,
in the absence of additional field data, DOE should use the NEEA field
study estimate of 311 cycles per year. (Id.) NEEA and NPCC noted that
the data from the NEEA field study showed a significant number of
clothes dryer loads required multiple cycles, either because the
clothes washer load was split, or because the load was not dried to a
satisfactory RMC. (Id.) NEEA and NPCC also noted that the NEEA field
study data showed that nearly 94 percent of loads washed in a clothes
washer were dried in a clothes dryer, compared to the 91 percent
assumed in the current DOE test procedure. (Id.) According to NEEA and
NPCC, this difference could be one source for the discrepancy in the
number of annual drying cycles. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 8)
Additionally, NEEA and NPCC stated that the large variation in
drying cycle times observed between the DOE test load and a ``real-
world'' load, in addition to the discrepancy in the number of annual
drying cycles discussed above, suggests that DOE's estimate of the
annual active mode hours and thus, standby mode and off mode hours, is
not consistent with actual field use. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 8)
NEEA and NPCC stated that, in the absence of additional field use data,
DOE should use the NEEA field study estimate of 8,463 standby and off-
mode hours per year in place of the current estimate of 8,620 hours per
year. (Id.)
6. DOE Response to Comments
As previously stated, test procedures promulgated by DOE must be
reasonably designed to produce test results which measure the energy
efficiency of a clothes dryer during a representative average use cycle
or period of use as determined by DOE. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The
Federal test procedure must also not be unduly burdensome to conduct.
(Id.)
DOE appreciates the issues raised by interested parties regarding
test procedure repeatability and reproducibility and consumer usage
habits, as well as the field data provided by NEEA. While the NEEA
field study data provides valuable information regarding the consumer
usage habits for clothes dryers, DOE recognizes that these data may not
be entirely representative of the consumer usage habits across the
entire United States over the course of a year. For example, because
the data were collected in the Pacific Northwest in the winter months,
the data may reflect heavier fabrics and larger quantities of clothing
items, which would also retain more moisture during the washing and
drying cycles. Such fabrics and quantities may not be representative of
consumer loads throughout the year, or consumer loads across varying
geographical regions.
In addition, it is not clear whether the NEEA field study data
presented regarding the cycle selections are an accurate reflection of
consumers actively selecting certain settings. For example, NEEA and
NPCC noted that the NEEA field study data showed that the medium
temperature setting accounted for 46 percent of cycles, while the high
temperature setting accounted for 43 percent of cycles. However, DOE
observes that a common control scheme is for clothes dryers, when set
to the normal cycle program, to automatically default to the medium
temperature setting and not allow the consumer to change the
temperature setting. It is not clear whether this control scheme
occurred in the NEEA field study, and if so, to what extent.
Additionally, it is unknown whether, in instances in which the consumer
may adjust the temperature setting under the ``normal'' cycle program,
the consumer may be selecting the highest temperature setting more
frequently. Without knowledge of the controls of each clothes dryer
monitored in the field study, it is difficult to draw conclusions
regarding the frequency of setting selections. DOE notes that the cycle
programs and settings could also be influenced by the potentially
heavier clothing and larger laundry load sizes during the winter months
during which the NEEA field study was conducted.
DOE also recognizes the difficulty in drawing conclusions regarding
load weights along with the initial and final RMC based on the NEEA
field study data. DOE notes that in the NEEA field study, a fixed
correction was used to calculate the bone-dry weight and measured RMC
of the laundry loads based on the load weight in ambient room
conditions prior to any washing or drying. In cases where the estimated
RMC of the laundry load was higher than 5 percent prior to any washing
or drying, the load was assumed to be wet and the weight after the
drying cycle was used as the bone-dry weight. DOE notes that different
clothing materials and load sizes may retain moisture differently, and
may be significantly impacted by ambient temperature and humidity
conditions. DOE also notes that the clothes washer and clothes dryer
for some sites monitored in the field study were located in
unconditioned spaces (e.g., garages or unconditioned basements), which
could also have a significant impact on the amount of moisture retained
in the clothing at ambient conditions. The NEEA field study data showed
a wide range of final RMC values, including
[[Page 35492]]
negative RMC values, which suggests that a single fixed correction
factor may not be an accurate reflection of the weight and RMC of the
load.
DOE is also concerned about placing too much emphasis on the field
study data as a means of developing representative load sizes or other
test parameters because different conclusions may be drawn depending on
how the data are aggregated for analysis. For example, as discussed in
section III.B.2 of this document, NEEA and NPCC commented that the
8.45-pound load size is fairly representative of the average load size
observed in the NEEA field study even though this load size represents
less than 15 percent of all loads in the field study. However, in the
NEEA field study report, loads in the 6-8 pound range and 9-11 pound
range accounted for the majority (over 50 percent) of all laundry
loads.\20\ In addition, a 16.9-pound load was suggested as part of the
Utility Test Protocol, but the NEEA field study data showed that loads
over 15 pounds accounted for less than 3 percent of all laundry loads
in the study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Dryer Field Study. 2014. Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance. Report No. E14-287. Pg. 29. https://www.neea.org/docs/default-source/reports/neea-clothes-dryer-field-study.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the NEEA field study data and comments from efficiency
advocates and utilities provide valuable information regarding the
consumer usage habits for clothes dryers, DOE does not have sufficient
information at this time to determine appropriate changes to the test
procedure.
To ensure that the test procedure measures energy use during a
representative average use cycle or period of use, DOE continues to
seek consumer usage data (e.g., load composition and sizes, cycle
selections, RMC, cycles per year) that are representative of the entire
United States over the course of a year. DOE requests data on how
frequently consumers select different cycle programs, temperature
settings, dryness settings, and other settings that could impact energy
use (e.g., ``eco mode''). DOE seeks data on representative load
compositions (materials, fabric, weave, etc.) and sizes, as well as the
corresponding cycle selections chosen by consumers for each particular
load. DOE also seeks consumer usage data on initial RMC and consumer-
acceptable final RMC levels for varying load compositions/sizes and
cycle selections.
DOE notes that the IEC is currently investigating alternative
clothes dryer test methods, including alternative load compositions and
sizes. IEC is in the process of qualifying alternative load
compositions and sizes to develop potential revisions to IEC Standard
61121. DOE recognizes that the test method required for certification
to and compliance with applicable energy conservation standards must be
designed to measure energy use during a representative average use
cycle or period of use, and not unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE will
consider any available information developed for the revised IEC
Standard 61121 as IEC's development program progresses.
For the reasons discussed, DOE is not proposing to amend the test
load composition and size, test cycle selections, RMC, and cycles per
year in its test procedures at this time.
DOE seeks comment on whether requiring the drying temperature
setting to be set to the maximum, if it can be chosen independently of
the program, is representative of the energy use of the clothes dryer
during a representative use cycle or period of use, or whether a lower
temperature setting would meet this statutory criterion. DOE also seeks
comment on whether a 2-percent final RMC under DOE test conditions is
representative of the energy use during an average use cycle or period
of use for clothes dryers with automatic termination controls, or
whether a different RMC meets this statutory criterion; and on whether
any other test conditions should be revised so that the test procedure
meets the applicable EPCA requirements.
DOE will continue to review and consider consumer usage data as it
becomes available and engage with stakeholders to collect additional
information regarding potential amendments to the DOE clothes dryer
test procedure to better represent consumer use. DOE expects that
continued work in this area will include collaboration with
stakeholders, including industry stakeholders, to determine if there
are test load composition and size specifications that may be more
representative of actual load composition and size, while providing
sufficient repeatability and reproducibility of test results and that
are not unduly burdensome. DOE would expect any such updated conditions
to be considered in future test procedure rulemakings and potentially
to provide the basis for evaluating amended energy conservation
standards following the current evaluation initiated through the
Request for Information published on March 27, 2015. 80 FR 16309.
C. Other Comments
1. Energy Use Metric
PG&E and SCE commented that when the performance of gas and
electric clothes dryers are compared on a site energy basis, gas
clothes dryers appear less efficient than electric clothes dryers
because losses associated with electricity generation are not
considered. (PG&E, No. 7 at p. 3; SCE, No. 11 at p. 3) According to
PG&E and SCE, based on their testing, using a metric based on carbon
dioxide emissions that they state fully accounts for losses of
electricity generation would result in gas clothes dryer efficiencies
being higher than those for all other clothes dryer types, including
heat pump clothes dryers. (PG&E, No. 7 at pp. 4-5, 12; SCE, No. 11 at
pp. 4-5, 12)
As DOE has explained in the context of test procedures for other
products, i.e., residential furnaces and boilers, the test procedure is
not the appropriate vehicle for deriving a full fuel cycle (``FFC'')
energy use metric, such as carbon dioxide emissions, for clothes
dryers. See, 81 FR 2628, 2638-2639 (Jan. 15, 2016). DOE may estimate
the FFC energy savings as part of any concurrent energy conservation
standards rulemaking for clothes dryers and take those savings into
account in proposing amended standards.
2. Effects of Clothes Dryers on Heating, Ventilation, and Air
Conditioning Energy Use
SEDI commented that DOE should investigate the effect of clothes
dryers on residential heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(``HVAC'') energy consumption. (SEDI, No. 6 at p. 3) SEDI stated that
vented clothes dryers expel air from the house, causing make-up air to
be drawn from outside the house that must be conditioned (either by
heating or cooling), which consumes energy as a direct consequence of
the clothes dryer operation, and that clothes dryers themselves also
heat and add moisture directly to the air inside a house. (Id.)
According to SEDI, these effects are significant in comparison to the
energy consumed by the clothes dryer and cause the energy performance
of ventless clothes dryers to be rated inaccurately in relation to
vented clothes dryers. (SEDI, No. 6 at pp. 3-4)
As described, EPCA requires that any prescribed or amended test
procedures be reasonably designed to produce test results that measure
energy efficiency, energy use, water use, or estimated annual operating
cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or
period of use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In prior clothes dryer energy
[[Page 35493]]
conservation standards and test procedure rulemakings, DOE considered
the issue SEDI raises here, and concluded that ``accounting for the
effects of clothes dryers on HVAC energy use is inconsistent with the
EPCA requirement that a test procedure measure the energy efficiency,
energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product. As
a result, DOE did not revise the clothes dryer test procedure to
account for HVAC energy use in the TP Final Rule and does not account
for HVAC energy use in these standards.'' 76 FR 22454, 22474 (Apr. 21,
2011); see also 76 FR 972, 1004-1005 (Jan. 6, 2011) (test procedure
final rule) For the same reasons, DOE is not proposing in this
rulemaking to amend its clothes dryer test procedure to account for the
clothes dryer impacts on HVAC energy use.
3. Washer-Dryer Test Procedure
PG&E and SCE commented that DOE should consider an integrated
washer-dryer test procedure in which the test load would be transferred
directly from the clothes washer at the end of the wash cycle to the
clothes dryer. (PG&E, No. 7 at p. 12; SCE, No. 11 at p. 12) PG&E and
SCE stated that development of an integrated washer-dryer test
procedure would provide additional data on clothes washer performance,
allow for a better understanding of ``synergies'' between the clothes
washer and clothes dryer in terms of energy efficiency and cycle times,
and reduce test burden by eliminating the step of wetting the clothing
to tight tolerances prior to running the clothes dryer test cycle,
which they deemed to be labor intensive. (Id.) NEEA and NPCC similarly
commented that DOE should consider an integrated test procedure in
which the clothes washer and matching clothes dryer are tested as a
pair. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 7) NEEA and NPCC stated that the NEEA
field study data show that the initial RMC for the drying cycle depends
substantially on the type of clothes washer, with clothes dryer loads
having an average initial RMC of 61 percent in homes with a horizontal-
axis clothes washer and 74 percent in homes with a vertical-axis
clothes washer. (NEEA & NPCC, No. 10 at p. 7) NEEA and NPCC added that
this large difference significantly impacts clothes dryer energy use.
(Id.)
EPCA requires DOE to establish test procedures that measure the
energy use or efficiency ``of a covered product'' during a
representative average use cycle or period of use. 42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3). EPCA does not authorize DOE to establish test procedures
that measure the energy use of two covered products when paired
together. In addition, different clothes washer models spin clothing
loads to different RMC levels, which in turn would affect the clothes
dryer initial RMC and the amount of moisture needed to be removed
during the drying cycle. As such, the measured efficiency of a clothes
dryer could be significantly impacted by the clothes washer with which
it is paired for the purpose of testing. Whether a clothes dryer would
comply with the energy conservation standard would be dependent, in
part, on the performance of the paired clothes washer.
SEDI commented that DOE should investigate test procedures for
combination washer-dryers so that the test procedure measures the total
energy consumption of the unit during a complete washing and drying
cycle. (SEDI, No. 6 at p. 4) SEDI commented that the total energy
consumption could then be allocated between the clothes washer and
clothes dryer energy use metrics based on an assumed RMC value between
the cycles. (Id.) SEDI stated that this would avoid giving combination
washer-dryers either an unfair advantage or disadvantage compared to
stand-alone clothes washers and clothes dryers. (Id.)
For combination washer-dryers, the clothes washer component is
required to demonstrate compliance with the current energy conservation
standards for consumer clothes washers using the clothes washer test
procedure at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix J2 (``appendix J2'').
The clothes dryer component of a combination washer-dryer is required
to demonstrate compliance with the current energy conservation
standards for clothes dryers using the clothes dryer test procedures in
either appendix D1 or appendix D2. EPCA similarly does not authorize
DOE to establish a single test procedure for combination washer-dryers
that would measure the total energy consumption of the unit during a
complete washing and drying cycle. 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3).
D. ``Connected'' Clothes Dryers
DOE is currently aware of a growing number of ``connected'' clothes
dryer models on the market, from at least six major manufacturers.
These products offer wireless network connectivity to enable features
such as remote monitoring and control via smartphone, as well as demand
response features \21\ available through partnerships with a small
number of local electric utilities. DOE observes a variety of
implementations of these connected features across different brands,
and that the design and operation of these features is continuously
evolving as the market continues to grow for these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ ``Demand response features'' refers to product
functionality that can be controlled by the ``smart grid'' to
improve the overall operation of the electrical grid, for example by
reducing energy consumption during peak periods and/or shifting
power consumption to off-peak periods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE notes that the ENERGY STAR program has incorporated connected
criteria into version 1.1 of the Product Specification for Clothes
Dryers.\22\ Products that qualify as ``connected'' \23\ are eligible
for a bonus of 5 percent applied to the model's CEF rating, which is
required to be measured using appendix D2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ENERGY STAR criteria for clothes dryers are available at
https://www.energystar.gov/products/appliances/clothes_dryers/partners.
\23\ The ENERGY STAR criteria define a ``connected clothes dryer
system'' as including a base appliance plus all hardware and
software elements required to enable communication in response to
consumer-authorized energy related commands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the availability of ``connected'' features on a clothes dryer
affects its standby mode power consumption (e.g., by energizing a
wireless communication chip on the circuit board) in the as-shipped
configuration, such impact would be measured by the current test
procedure provisions in section 3.6 of appendices D1 and D2 for
measuring standby mode and off mode power. Whereas, if the standby
power consumption is not affected unless the consumer actively enables
the connected functionality on the unit, any incremental standby power
consumption resulting from the connected features would not be measured
by the current test procedure because the test procedure does not
include instructions for activating any such features before performing
the standby mode and off mode measurement. Similarly, any incremental
energy consumption in active mode, or any other modes of operation
impacted by the product's connected features, would not be measured as
part of the DOE test procedure, because the test cycle requirements
within section 3.3 of appendices D1 and D2 do not include instructions
for activating any such features before performing the active mode
drying cycle measurements.
DOE recently published a request for information (RFI) on the
emerging smart technology appliance and equipment market. 83 FR 46886
(Sept. 17, 2018). In that RFI, DOE sought information to better
understand market trends and issues in the emerging market for
[[Page 35494]]
appliances and commercial equipment that incorporate smart technology.
DOE's intent in issuing the RFI was to ensure that DOE did not
inadvertently impede such innovation in fulfilling its statutory
obligations in setting efficiency standards for covered products and
equipment. In this NOPR, consistent with the September 2018 RFI, DOE
proposes to specify in section 3.3 of appendix D1, and sections 3.3.1
and 3.3.2 of appendix D2, that units with network capabilities be
tested with the network-connected functions in the ``off'' position.
DOE seeks comment on the proposal to specify that units with
network capabilities be tested with the network-connected functions in
the ``off'' position and on the issues presented in the September 2018
RFI as they may be applicable to clothes dryers.
DOE also seeks the following information regarding connected
clothes dryers that could inform future test procedure considerations:
DOE requests feedback on its characterization of connected clothes
dryers currently on the market. Specifically, DOE requests input on the
types of features or functionality enabled by connected clothes dryers
that exist on the market or that are under development.
DOE requests data on the percentage of users purchasing connected
clothes dryers, and, for those users, the percentage of the time when
the connected functionality of the clothes dryer is used.
DOE requests feedback on the types of impacts that should be
included in any future assessments of features associated with
connected clothes dryers.
DOE requests data on the amount of additional or reduced energy use
of connected clothes dryers.
DOE requests data on the pattern of additional or reduced energy
use of connected clothes dryers; for example, whether it is constant,
periodic, or triggered by the user.
DOE requests information on any existing testing protocols that
account for connected features of clothes dryers, as well as any
testing protocols that may be under development within the industry.
E. Maintaining Hourly Btu Rating for Gas Clothes Dryers
Section 2.3.2.1 of appendix D1 and appendix D2 provides
requirements for natural gas clothes dryers for maintaining the hourly
British thermal unit (``Btu'') rating of the burner during testing to
within 5 percent of the hourly Btu rating specified by the
manufacturer.\24\ Section 2.3.2.2 provides analogous requirements for
propane clothes dryers. The intent of these requirements is to provide
repeatable test conditions, recognizing that the rate of heat input
into a clothes dryer can significantly affect its performance. Both
sections provide instructions regarding tolerances and adjustments that
can be made to the inlet gas pressure,\25\ gas pressure regulator
setpoint,\26\ and/or modifications to the orifice,\27\ in order to
maintain the hourly Btu rating within 5 percent of the
rating specified by the manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ The hourly Btu rating of a gas clothes dryer is typically
specified on the product's nameplate sticker.
\25\ For natural gas clothes dryers, section 2.3.2.1 specifies
maintaining the gas supply pressure immediately ahead of all
controls within a range of 7 to 10 inches of water column. For
propane clothes dryers, section 2.3.2.2 specifies maintaining the
gas supply pressure immediately ahead of all controls within a range
of 11 to 13 inches of water column.
\26\ For both natural gas and propane clothes dryers, if the
clothes dryer is equipped with a gas appliance pressure regulator
for which the manufacturer specifies an outlet pressure, the
regulator outlet pressure must be maintained within 10
percent of the value recommended by the manufacturer in the
installation manual, on the nameplate sticker, or wherever the
manufacturer makes such a recommendation for the basic model.
\27\ The orifice is an attachment that typically screws into the
outlet of the gas pressure regulator and has a small-diameter outlet
hole, through which the gas flows into the burner. For both natural
gas and propane clothes dryers, the test procedures provide for
modifying the orifice of the gas burner as necessary if the required
hourly Btu rating cannot be achieved under the allowable range in
gas inlet pressure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has received questions regarding the order for considering
adjustments to either the regulator setpoint or inlet gas pressure, or
modifying the orifice. The test procedures currently provide for
modifying the orifice of the gas burner as necessary if the required
hourly Btu rating cannot be achieved under the allowable range in gas
inlet pressure, indicating that adjustments to the gas inlet pressure
should be made before considering modifications to the orifice.
However, the large majority of clothes dryers on the market include a
gas pressure regulator, which is situated between the gas inlet and the
orifice. Since the purpose of a gas pressure regulator is to provide a
constant output pressure regardless of fluctuations in upstream supply
pressure, adjusting the gas inlet pressure upstream of a pressure
regulator will typically have no impact on the pressure of the gas
exiting the regulator and entering the orifice, or likewise the hourly
Btu rating.
To provide further direction applicable to the large majority of
clothes dryers on the market that include a gas pressure regulator, DOE
proposes to specify that the order of adjustment for maintaining the
hourly Btu rating within specification is as follows: (first) adjust
the supply gas pressure, (second) adjust the pressure regulator
setpoint, or (third) modify the orifice as necessary. This proposed
order specifies using an approach with the least amount of test burden
necessary to achieve the specified test conditions. This also
corresponds to the least amount of modification to the unit that would
be necessary to achieve the specified test conditions. Adjusting the
supply gas inlet pressure requires no modifications to the clothes
dryer itself. Adjusting the pressure regulator setpoint typically
requires removing an access panel on the clothes dryer and tightening
or loosening a screw on the regulator. Modifying the orifice typically
requires removing an access panel on the clothes dryer, disassembling
the burner, removing the orifice, modifying the orifice (e.g., by
drilling a larger-diameter outlet hole), reinstalling the orifice, and
finally reassembling the burner.
In DOE's testing experience, any deviation of the hourly Btu rating
beyond 5 percent of the rated value can be remedied with a
minor adjustment to the gas pressure regulator (within the allowable
range of 10 percent of the recommended pressure level).
Based on DOE's experience with third-party test laboratories,
preferentially starting with the least burdensome adjustments before
trying progressively more burdensome adjustments is generally
consistent with industry practice.
DOE proposes to provide this direction in a new section 2.3.2.3 in
both appendix D1 and appendix D2, which would apply to both natural gas
and propane clothes dryers. In conjunction, DOE proposes simplifying
the existing provisions within sections 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2 to reduce
duplication with provisions that would be included in the new section
2.3.2.3, and therefore improve the overall readability of the test
procedures.
DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify that the order of
adjustment for maintaining the hourly Btu rating within specification
is as follows: (first) adjust the supply gas pressure, (second) adjust
the pressure regulator setpoint, or (third) modify the orifice as
necessary.
F. Inactive and Off Mode Power Measurements
Section 3.6 of appendix D1 and appendix D2 \28\ provides the
[[Page 35495]]
instructions for measuring standby \29\ (``inactive'' \30\) mode and
off mode \31\ power on the clothes dryer. The per-cycle combined total
energy consumption of a clothes dryer includes the combined
representative measures of inactive mode and off mode power. Appendix
D1, sections 4.5 and 4.6; appendix D2, sections 4.5 and 4.6. The test
procedure distinguishes between inactive mode and off-mode. Id.
However, when only one of the low-power modes is present, regardless of
whether the low-power mode is considered inactive mode or off mode, the
same measurement and calculation is performed.\32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ As proposed in this NOPR, section 3.6 of appendix D2 would
be renumbered as section 3.5, as a result of removing obsolete
provisions from the test procedures. See section III.K.5 of this
notice for additional details.
\29\ Section 1.17 of appendix D1 and section 1.18 of appendix D2
define ``standby mode'' as any mode in which the product is
connected to a mains power source and offers one or more of the
following user-oriented or protective functions that may persist for
an indefinite period of time: (1) A function that facilitates the
activation of other modes (including activation or deactivation of
active mode) by remote switch (including remote control), internal
sensor, or timer; or (2) continuous functions, including information
or status displays (including clocks) or sensor-based functions. The
definition also specifies that a timer is a continuous clock
function (which may or may not be associated with a display) that
provides regular, scheduled tasks (e.g., switching) and that
operates on a continuous basis.
\30\ Section 1.12 of appendix D1 and section 1.13 of appendix D2
define ``inactive mode'' as a standby mode that facilitates the
activation of active mode by remote switch (including remote
control), internal sensor, or timer, or that provides continuous
status display.
\31\ Section 1.15 of appendix D1 and section 1.16 of appendix D2
define ``off mode'' as a mode in which the clothes dryer is
connected to a mains power source and is not providing any active
mode or standby function, and where the mode may persist for an
indefinite period of time. The definition further states that an
indicator that only shows the user that the product is in the off
position is included within the classification of an off mode.
\32\ Distinguishing inactive mode from off mode is not an issue
when both are present. When both modes are present, inactive mode
and off mode can be distinguished from each other based on the
measured energy use; i.e., inactive mode will result in a higher
measured energy use than off mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has received questions from interested parties regarding
difficulties in determining whether the low-power mode on certain
products, including clothes dryers, is considered inactive mode or off
mode when only one of the modes is present. Because the test procedure
calculation treats both modes in the same manner, requiring this
distinction creates unnecessary test burden. DOE addressed a similar
issue in the final rule published August 5, 2015 (the ``August 2015
Final Rule'') amending the clothes washer test procedure. 80 FR 46730,
46747-46749.
As discussed in the August 2015 Final Rule, a third-party
laboratory stated that the ``off'' state on some appliances is achieved
through a software/firmware action (i.e., through a ``soft switch'')
rather than a hard on/off switch (i.e., a switch that physically breaks
the connection to the mains power supply), and that it is not clear
whether the product is providing any active mode or standby function
while in the ``off'' state. 80 FR 46730, 46748. Another third-party
laboratory described the difficulty for an independent third-party
laboratory to determine if the on/off button is a hard switch or a soft
switch. Id. According to the commenter, if the third-party laboratory
is unable to obtain this information from the manufacturer, the next
best option is to review the product's electrical schematic; however,
the schematic is often located somewhere inside the machine, such as
behind the console. Id. The commenter further questioned whether a
third-party laboratory could remove the console during testing to
determine if the switch is a hard switch or soft switch; or,
alternatively, if the machine must not be disassembled, whether DOE
could specify another method to determine the type of switch. Id.
The current procedure for measuring inactive and/or off mode power
is as follows. Section 3.6.1 of appendix D1 and appendix D2 instructs
the testing party to measure the inactive mode power, if the clothes
dryer has an inactive mode. Similarly, section 3.6.2 of both appendices
instructs the testing party to measure the off mode power, if the
clothes dryer has an off mode. In section 4.5 of both appendices, if a
clothes dryer has either inactive mode or off mode (but not both), the
measured power is multiplied by 8,620, representing the combined annual
hours that the clothes dryer is not in active mode (i.e., idle).
Alternatively, if a clothes dryer has both inactive mode and off mode
(e.g., an electronic control panel that also provides a hard off switch
that can completely disconnect all power to the product), the power of
each mode is measured and multiplied by one-half of 8,620 (i.e.,
4,310), and the results are summed.\33\ As these sections are currently
structured, the test laboratory must first determine whether the low-
power mode(s) that exists on the clothes dryer meets the definition of
inactive mode or off mode--even though the same calculation applies,
yielding the same end result, regardless of the distinction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ This calculation represents an estimate that such a clothes
dryer would spend half of its low-power mode hours in inactive mode,
and the other half of its low-power mode hours in off mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed, it may be difficult to determine whether a product is
providing any active mode or standby function while in the idle low-
power state. To avoid the unnecessary burden associated with
potentially needing to remove a product's console to access the
electrical schematic and/or determine if the switch is a ``hard''
switch or ``soft'' electronic switch, DOE is proposing to amend the
test provisions in appendix D1 and appendix D2 for measuring inactive
mode \34\ and off mode using nomenclature based on observable and
measurable characteristics of the clothes dryer, rather than based on
knowledge of the control panel switch type or internal functionality of
the clothes dryer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Inactive mode is the only type of standby mode required to
be measured in appendix D1 and appendix D2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed approach would not change what energy is measured.
This proposed approach would still measure inactive mode and off mode
energy use to the extent that a product has one or both modes, but
would not require specifying the specific mode being measured when only
one is present, as the calculation treats both modes the same. This
proposal is similar to the approach DOE adopted for the clothes washer
test procedures. 10 CFR part 430 subpart B appendix J2 section 3.9; 80
FR 46730, 46747-46749.
Currently, sections 3.6.1 and sections 3.6.2 of appendix D1 and
appendix D2 provide separate symbol designations for the inactive mode
and off mode power measurements: PIA and POFF,
respectively. If a clothes dryer has either inactive mode or off mode
(but not both), the average power consumption of the available mode is
measured and labeled as either PIA or POFF,
accordingly. Id. As described, regardless of whether the average low-
power measurement is designated as PIA or POFF,
section 4.5 of both appendices applies the total 8,620 annual hours to
the measurement. If both inactive mode and off mode are available on
the clothes dryer, section 4.5 applies 4,310 hours to each of the two
average power measurements. Id.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to amend the testing methodology in
section 3.6 of appendix D1 and newly renumbered section 3.5 of appendix
D2 and the calculations in section 4.5 of both appendix D1 and appendix
D2 by revising the nomenclature and symbols used for the standby and
off mode measurements. DOE proposes to change these symbols,
PIA and POFF, to Pdefault and
Plowest, and the assignment of each symbol to its respective
measurement
[[Page 35496]]
would be based on observable and measurable characteristics of the
clothes dryer rather than the control panel switch type or internal
functionality of the clothes dryer. If only inactive mode or off mode
is available, the measured average energy use would be represented by
Pdefault. If both inactive mode and off mode are available,
Pdefault would represent the average measured energy use of
inactive mode and Plowest would represent the measured
energy use of off mode. In addition, DOE is proposing to revise the
wording of the testing instructions in section 3.6 of appendix D1 and
in newly renumbered section 3.5 of appendix D2 to specify how the
procedure corresponds to the sequence of events as they would be
performed during testing. This proposed procedure would produce test
results that yield the same measured energy as in section 3.6 of the
current procedures for all clothes dryer types currently on the market.
The proposed amendments would revise the current structure of
section 3.6 in both appendix D1 and appendix D2. Section 3.6 of
appendix D1 and newly renumbered section 3.5 of appendix D2 would state
that for a clothes dryer that takes some time to automatically enter a
stable inactive/off mode state from a higher power state, as discussed
in Section 5, Paragraph 5.1, note 1 of IEC Standard 62301, allow
sufficient time for the clothes dryer to automatically reach the
default inactive/off mode state before proceeding with the test
measurement. The revised wording would replace the currently used term
``lower power state'' with ``default standby/off mode state,''
recognizing that the lower power state that the clothes dryer reaches
by default may be either a standby (inactive) mode or an off mode.
The proposed amendment would also include the procedural
instructions for performing the power measurement, with the calculation
symbols revised, in section 3.6.1 of appendix D1 and 3.5.1 of appendix
D2. The proposed instructions would state that once the stable
inactive/off mode state has been reached, the default inactive/off mode
power, Pdefault, in watts, is measured and recorded
following the test procedure for the sampling method specified in
Section 5, Paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301.
For clothes dryers with both an inactive mode and off mode as
contemplated in the current test procedure (i.e, clothes dryers with
electronic controls that offer an optional switch (or other means) that
can be selected by the end user to achieve a lower power state than the
default inactive/off mode state),\35\ the proposed section 3.6.2 of
appendix D1 and 3.5.2 of appendix D2 would require that, after
performing the measurement in section 3.6.1 of appendix D1 or 3.5.1 of
appendix D2, the switch (or other means) be activated to the position
resulting in the lowest power consumption and the measurement procedure
described in section 3.6.1 and 3.5.1, respectively, be repeated. The
average power consumption would be measured and recorded as the lowest
standby/off mode power, Plowest, in watts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Such a feature could be labeled on the control panel as a
``master power'' or ``on/off'' switch, for example.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed revisions to section 4.5 of both appendix D1 and
appendix D2 would apply annual hours to the average power
measurement(s) performed in section 3.6 of both appendix D1 and
appendix D2, consistent with the current test procedure. For those
clothes dryers with a single low-power mode average power consumption
measurement (newly labeled as Pdefault), the calculation
would apply the total 8,620 annual hours to this measurement. For those
clothes dryers with two average power measurements (relabeled as
Pdefault and Plowest), section 4.5 would apply
4,310 hours to each of the two measurements.
In addition, DOE testing suggests that testing a clothes dryer's
standby or off mode power consumption directly after connecting the
clothes dryer to the electrical energy supply is not always
representative of the standby or off mode power consumption after its
first use. Therefore, DOE proposes to specify that standby mode and off
mode testing in section 3.6 of appendix D1 and newly renumbered section
3.5 of appendix D2 be performed after completion of an active mode
drying cycle; after removing the test load; without changing the
control panel settings used for the active mode drying cycle; with the
door closed; and without disconnecting the electrical energy supply to
the clothes dryer between completion of the active mode drying cycle
and the start of standby mode and off mode testing. This specification
would preclude performing standby mode and off mode testing directly
after connecting the clothes dryer to the electrical energy supply. DOE
notes that the order of sections within the clothes dryer test
procedures suggests that the standby mode and off mode measurement
(section 3.6 of appendix D1 and section 3.5 of appendix D2) is
performed after the active mode test cycle (sections 3.3 through 3.5 of
appendix D1 and sections 3.3 and 3.4 of appendix D2); therefore, the
proposed approach likely reflects current practice within the industry.
This revision also would ensure that the results of the standby mode
and off mode testing accurately represent the conditions most likely to
be experienced during a representative average use cycle or period of
use. These changes would be consistent with the approach that was
adopted as part of the August 2015 Final Rule amending the DOE clothes
washer test procedure. 80 FR 46730, 46747-46749.
DOE requests comments on whether the order of sections within the
test procedure reflects the order in which test laboratories perform
the test. Specifically, DOE requests comments on whether performing the
standby mode and off mode testing after the active mode testing
reflects current practice by test laboratories.
The proposed revisions to sections 3.6 of appendix D1 and 3.5 of
appendix D2 are intended to provide a clearer set of procedural
instructions for performing the standby mode and off mode measurements
required in sections 3.6 of the current test procedures. Under the
proposed sections 3.6 of appendix D1 and 3.5 of appendix D2, the same
sequence of measurements would be performed as in the current sections
3.6, and thus would yield the same power measurement(s) for clothes
dryers with inactive mode, off mode, or both. Further, the same annual
hours as are currently specified would be applied to the average power
measurement(s) in section 4.5 of both appendix D1 and appendix D2.
Therefore, DOE has initially determined that these proposed amendments
to sections 3.6 and 4.5 of both appendix D1 and appendix D2 would not
impact the measured efficiency of clothes dryers.
DOE requests comments on its proposal to amend the methods for
measuring inactive mode and off mode power consumption of clothes
dryers.
G. Final RMC Requirements for Automatic Termination Control Dryers
Section 3.3.2 of appendix D2 specifies that for automatic
termination control dryers, a ``normal'' program must be selected for
the test cycle. In addition, where the temperature and dryness level
settings can be chosen independently of the program, the test procedure
specifies that they be set to maximum temperature setting and the
``normal'' or ``medium'' dryness level setting, respectively. Id. The
clothes dryer is then operated until the completion of the programmed
cycle, including the cool down period. Id. The
[[Page 35497]]
test procedure provides that, if the final RMC is greater than 2
percent, the test is invalid and that a new run must be conducted using
the highest dryness level setting. Id.
DOE received an inquiry regarding whether any second test run using
the highest dryness level setting must also result in a final RMC of 2
percent or less for the test to be considered valid.
DOE notes that, as part of the August 2013 Final Rule, interested
parties submitted a joint comment presenting test results that
demonstrate that a final RMC of 2 percent using the DOE test cloth is
representative of the consumer-accepted dryness level after completion
of a drying cycle. 78 FR 49608, 49614. DOE agreed with this conclusion
and adopted provisions that specify that a test conducted on the
``normal'' or ``medium'' dryness setting is considered valid only if
the final RMC is 2 percent or lower. 78 FR 49608, 49621, 49624. DOE
interprets that the 2-percent final RMC threshold for a valid test
should apply to all test cycles run according to section 3.3.2 of
appendix D2, including test runs using the highest dryness level
setting, so that the energy consumption of the clothes dryer will be
measured for drying the load to the consumer-accepted dryness level.
DOE provided this interpretation in guidance issued on January 10,
2017.\36\ This approach is consistent with the EPCA requirements that
test procedures must be ``reasonably designed to produce test results''
that measure energy use ``during a representative average use cycle.''
42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3). Based on the information presented during the
prior rulemaking, during the representative average use of a clothes
dryer, clothes are dried to a final RMC that is equivalent to 2-percent
RMC in the DOE test load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Clothes Dryer Final Guidance issued January 10, 2017.
Available at https://www1.eere.energy.gov/guidance/detail_search.aspx?IDQuestion=665&pid=2&spid=1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to amend section 3.3.2 of appendix
D2 to explicitly specify that any second test run using the highest
dryness level setting must result in a final RMC of 2 percent or less
for the test to be considered valid. As discussed, DOE has applied the
final RMC value of 2 percent as representative of the energy use during
an average use cycle or period of use. If the basic model under test
fails to achieve an RMC of 2 percent or less when tested at the highest
dryness level setting, the dryer has not sufficiently dried the clothes
and the test results may not be used for certification of compliance
with energy conservation standards. Further, DOE proposes to amend the
nomenclature of sections 4.1 through 4.4 of appendix D2 to clarify that
the measured energy consumption values represented by Ece,
Ege, Egg, and Ecg, respectively,
reflect the energy required to achieve a final RMC of 2 percent or
less.
DOE requests comments on its proposal to specify explicitly that
any second test run using the highest dryness level setting must result
in a final RMC of 2 percent or less for the test to be considered
valid, and its proposal to amend the nomenclature of sections 4.1
through 4.4 of appendix D2 to clarify that the measured energy
consumption represented by Ece, Ege,
Egg, and Ecg, respectively, reflects the energy
required to achieve a final RMC of 2 percent or less. DOE also requests
comment on whether a different final RMC would more appropriately
represent the consumer-acceptable end point of an average use cycle.
H. Dryness Level Selection for Automatic Termination Control Dryers
Section 3.3.2 of appendix D2 states that where the dryness level
setting can be chosen independently of the program, it shall be set to
the ``normal'' or ``medium'' dryness level setting. If such designation
is not provided, then the dryness level is set at the mid-point between
the minimum and maximum settings. Id. DOE has received inquiries from
third-party test laboratories regarding clothes dryers that have four
dryness settings, such that a single mid-point between the minimum and
maximum settings is not available.
DOE is proposing to specify in section 3.3.2 of appendix D2 that if
an even number of discrete settings are provided, the next-highest
setting above the midpoint, in the direction of the maximum dryness
setting, or the next-lowest setting below the midpoint, in the
direction of the minimum dryness setting, should be used.
DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify the dryness setting
for clothes dryers that provide an even number of discrete dryness
settings that can be chosen independently of the program.
I. General Test Procedure Provisions at 10 CFR 430.23(d)
The general test procedure provisions for clothes dryers in 10 CFR
430.23(d) include methods for calculating the estimated annual
operating cost, CEF, and other useful measures of energy consumption
using appendix D1. In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to amend 10 CFR
430.23(d) to also allow for calculating each of these metrics using
appendix D2, to accommodate clothes dryers that are optionally tested
using appendix D2.
DOE recognizes that consumers may also value information about
clothes dryer annual energy use, in addition to annual operating cost.
Therefore, DOE is proposing to include methods for calculating the
estimated annual energy use, which would be calculated as the product
of the number of drying cycles per year and the per-cycle combined
total energy consumption, in kilowatt-hours (``kWh'').\37\ Both of
these factors are already included in the existing calculation of
annual operating cost. This new calculation would be inserted at 10 CFR
430.23(d)(1), with existing paragraph (d)(1) renumbered as (d)(2)
accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ For gas clothes dryers, the gas dryer per-cycle gas energy
consumption is converted from Btu to kWh and then added to the per-
cycle gas dryer electrical energy consumption to calculate the per-
cycle combined total energy consumption in kWh.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on its proposal to allow for calculating each
useful measure of energy consumption in 10 CFR 430.23(d) using appendix
D2, to accommodate clothes dryers that are optionally tested using
appendix D2. DOE also requests comment on its proposal to include a new
method for calculating estimated annual energy use of a clothes dryer.
J. Rounding Requirements for Reported Values
DOE proposes adding a new section at 10 CFR 429.21(c) to specify
the rounding requirements of all numeric reported values for clothes
dryers as follows: CEF to the nearest 0.01 pound per kilowatt hour (lb/
kWh), capacity to the nearest 0.1 cubic feet (cu.ft.), voltage to the
nearest volt, and hourly Btu rating to the nearest Btu. Similarly, DOE
proposes adding the same rounding requirement for the capacity
measurement in section 3.1 of both appendix D1 and D2, which would add
specificity to the measurement of drum capacity as it relates to
determining whether a compact-size load (for a drum capacity less than
4.4 cu.ft.) or standard-size load must be used for testing.
The proposed rounding requirements for CEF, capacity, voltage, and
Btu rating would maintain consistency with the level of precision
currently provided in DOE's Compliance Certification Management System.
DOE also proposes to specify the rounding instructions provided at
10 CFR 430.23(d)(1) (renumbered to paragraph (d)(2) as proposed in this
document) pertaining to estimated annual operating cost. Currently, the
rounding instructions for an electric
[[Page 35498]]
clothes dryer are embedded within paragraph (d)(1)(i)(C). DOE proposes
moving the rounding instructions to paragraph (d)(1)(i) to clarify that
the rounding provision applies to the product of all three factors
multiplied in paragraphs (d)(1)(i)(A), (B), and (C). Similarly, for gas
clothes dryers, DOE proposed to move the rounding instructions from its
current location embedded within paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(B) to the higher-
level paragraph at (d)(1)(ii).
DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of its proposed
rounding requirements of all numeric reported values and estimated
annual operating cost for clothes dryers.
K. Formatting Changes and Typographical Errors
In an effort to improve the readability of the text in certain
sections of appendix D1 and appendix D2, DOE is proposing to make minor
typographical corrections and formatting modifications as follows.
These minor proposed modifications are not intended to change the
substance of the test methods or descriptions provided in these
sections.
1. ``Conventional'' and ``Vented'' Nomenclature
Appendix D1 and appendix D2 define the term ``conventional clothes
dryer'' as a clothes dryer that exhausts the evaporated moisture from
the cabinet. This definition is synonymous with a ``vented clothes
dryer.'' Conversely, ``ventless clothes dryer'' is defined as a clothes
dryer that uses a closed-loop system with an internal condenser to
remove the evaporated moisture from the heated air. The moist air is
not discharged from the cabinet.
DOE's product class definitions for clothes dryers use the terms
``vented clothes dryer'' and ``ventless clothes dryer'' to refer to the
different methods used by the clothes dryer to remove moisture from the
cabinet. To provide consistency between DOE's product class definitions
and the terminology used in the clothes dryer test procedures, DOE is
proposing to replace the word ``conventional'' with ``vented''
throughout both appendix D1 and appendix D2. This change would affect
the nomenclature only and would not affect the classification of
clothes dryers or conduct of the test procedure for any clothes dryers.
2. Symbol Definitions
Appendix D1 and appendix D2 include inconsistent use of symbol
definitions for the measured bone-dry weight and moisture content
values. DOE is proposing to add the symbol definition for bone-dry
weight (Wbonedry) to section 3.4.1 of both appendices, where
it is first referenced. DOE is proposing to change the symbol
definitions for moisture content of the wet test load (currently
Ww) and moisture content of the dry test load (currently
Wd) to MCw and MCd, respectively, to
better differentiate these percentage values from Wbonedry,
which is a weight value. Similarly, DOE also proposes to add the symbol
definitions MCw and MCd to sections 3.4.2 and
3.4.3, respectively, where they are first referenced in both appendix
D1 and appendix D2. These revised symbol definitions would also be
updated throughout section 4 of both appendices in each calculation in
which they are used. The addition and revision of these symbol
definitions will more readily provide an understanding of the measured
values associated with each of these symbols, as well as improve the
readability of subsequent sections of the test procedures where these
symbols are referenced.
3. Removal of Duplicate Instructions for Test Load Preparation
Sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 of both appendix D1 and appendix D2
include duplicative instructions for preparing a damp test load before
loading. DOE is proposing to remove this duplication by creating one
new section that defines the test load sizes and one new section that
describes test load preparation. For both appendices, the revised
section 2.7.1 would include a table showing the required test loads for
standard-size and compact-size clothes dryers, in addition to the
requirement that each test load must consist of energy test cloths and
no more than five energy stuffer cloths. For both appendices, the
revised section 2.7.2 would provide the procedure for dampening the
test load. These amendments would not change the conduct of the test
procedure for either appendix D1 or appendix D2, but would provide
improved readability of the test procedures.
4. Typographical Errors
DOE proposes to correct the following typographical errors in
appendix D1 and appendix D2:
Sections 1.5 and 2.6 of appendix D1 and sections 1.6, 2.7.1, and
2.7.2 of appendix D2 use the term ``test clothes,'' where ``test
cloths'' should be used instead. Section 1.16 of appendix D2 misspells
the term ``classification'' in the definition of ``off mode.''
Section 2.4.1 of both appendix D1 and appendix D2 contain section
numbering errors. Currently, section 2.4.1 is titled Weighing scale for
test cloth and includes specifications for the scale used to weigh the
test loads, and the section that follows is incorrectly numbered as
2.4.1.2 Weighing scale for drum capacity measurements. DOE is proposing
to correct this in both appendix D1 and appendix D2 by inserting a new
title section 2.4.1 Weighing scales and renumbering existing section
2.4.1 Weighing scale for test cloth as 2.4.1.1.
The calculation of the total per-cycle electric dryer energy
consumption in section 4.1 of appendix D1 references an undefined
symbol ``Ett'', which should instead be ``Et'',
the total energy consumed during the test cycle as recorded in section
3.4.5 of appendix D1. The word ``for'' is also missing from the wording
of the 1.04 field use factor.
In addition, section 4.3 of both appendix D1 and appendix D2
reference the symbol ``Ege'', which should instead be
``Egg'', the calculated gas dryer gas energy consumption per
cycle.
5. Removal of Obsolete Provisions
Section 1.14 of appendix D1 and section 1.15 of appendix D2 provide
a definition for ``moisture sensing control'' \38\; similarly, section
1.18 of appendix D1 and section 1.19 of appendix D2 provide a
definition for ``temperature sensing control.'' \39\ Both of these
definitions are obsolete, having been incorporated into a broader term
``automatic termination control'' \40\ in section 1.4 of both
appendices as part of the January 2011 final rule. 76 FR 972, 978. In
addition, the terms ``moisture sensing control'' and ``temperature
sensing control'' are not refenced anywhere else within appendix D1 or
appendix D2. DOE therefore proposes removing these definitions from
both appendices and renumbering the subsequent sections of the test
procedure accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ ``Moisture sensing control'' is defined as a system which
utilizes a moisture sensing element within the dryer drum that
monitors the amount of moisture in the clothes and automatically
terminates the dryer cycle.
\39\ ``Temperature sensing control'' is defined as a system
which monitors dryer exhaust air temperature and automatically
terminates the dryer cycle.
\40\ ``Automatic termination control'' is defined as a dryer
control system with a sensor which monitors either the dryer load
temperature or its moisture content and with a controller which
automatically terminates the drying process. A mark, detent, or
other visual indicator or detent which indicates a preferred
automatic termination control setting must be present if the dryer
is to be classified as having an ``automatic termination control.''
A mark is a visible single control setting on one or more dryer
controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3.5 of appendix D2 describes the application of a field use
factor for
[[Page 35499]]
clothes dryers with automatic termination controls. In the August 2013
Final Rule, DOE eliminated the field use factor in appendix D2 for
automatic termination control dryers, in conjunction with new
procedures that directly measure any over-drying energy consumption of
automatic termination control dryers. 78 FR 49608, 49611. In the August
2013 final rule, DOE erroneously omitted regulatory language to remove
the obsolete section 3.5 of appendix D2. DOE therefore proposes to
remove section 3.5 of appendix D2, and to adjust the numbering of
subsequent sections accordingly.
Section 4.7 of both appendix D1 and appendix D2 provides the
equation for calculating EF. DOE's energy conservation standards for
clothes dryers were based on EF for clothes dryers manufactured on or
after May 14, 1994 and before January 1, 2015. However, as of January
1, 2015, clothes dryer energy conservation standards are based on the
CEF metric. Similarly, DOE's certification reporting requirements for
clothes dryers at 10 CFR 429.21(b)(2) require reporting CEF when using
appendix D1 or appendix D2; EF was required only when using appendix D,
which is now obsolete. Furthermore, ENERGY STAR qualification is based
on the CEF metric. DOE is not aware of any current regulatory programs
or criteria that use the EF metric. Therefore, DOE is proposing to
remove the obsolete calculation of EF in section 4.7 of both appendix
D1 and appendix D2, and renumbering the subsequent sections of the test
procedures accordingly, and removing EF as a measure of energy
consumption described at 10 CFR 430.23(d)(2).
DOE requests comment on any potential unintended consequences of
its proposals regarding minor typographical corrections and formatting
modifications.
L. Removing Obsolete Appendix D
DOE is proposing to remove appendix D from 10 CFR part 430 since
this version of the test procedure is no longer used. DOE is also
proposing to remove the references to appendix D from 10 CFR 430.23(d),
as well as in the clothes dryer certification reporting requirements in
10 CFR 429.21(b)(2).
DOE requests comment on its proposal to remove appendix D and all
associated references throughout 10 CFR 429.21 and 10 CFR 430.23(d).
M. Compliance Date
EPCA prescribes that all representations of energy efficiency and
energy use, including those made on marketing materials and product
labels, must be made in accordance with an amended test procedure,
beginning 180 days after publication of such a test procedure final
rule in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) If DOE were to
publish an amended test procedure for clothes dryers, EPCA provides an
allowance for individual manufacturers to petition DOE for an extension
of the 180-day period if the manufacturer may experience undue hardship
in meeting the 180-day deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) To receive such
an extension, petitions must be filed with DOE no later than 60 days
before the end of the 180-day period and must detail how the
manufacturer will experience undue hardship. (Id.)
In addition, DOE proposes to amend the introductory note in both
appendix D1 and appendix D2 to remove reference to the optional early
use of the test procedures before the compliance date of the current
clothes dryer energy conservation standards, which was January 1, 2015.
DOE proposes to specify that manufacturers may use either appendix D1
or appendix D2 to determine compliance with energy conservation
standards for clothes dryers.
N. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization, and Other Topics
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
EPCA requires that test procedures proposed by DOE not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. In this NOPR, DOE proposes a number of
amendments to both appendix D1 and appendix D2. As described previously
in this document, the use of appendix D2 is optional. The current
energy conservation standards for clothes dryers were developed based
on results obtained using appendix D1. In the analysis that follows,
DOE considers only the impacts to testing under appendix D1. Although
DOE has initially determined that the proposed amendments to appendix
D2 would not impact costs, if adopted, DOE would consider any such
impacts at such time that appendix D2 becomes required for use, such as
for demonstrating compliance with an amended energy conservation
standard that is based on test results generated using appendix D2,
should such an amendment be adopted.
None of the proposed amendments to appendix D1 would impact the
scope of the test procedure (i.e., the proposal would not require
manufacturers to test clothes dryers that are not already required to
be tested). Additionally, DOE has initially determined that none of the
proposed amendments would require manufacturers to re-test or re-
certify any existing models on the market that have been tested and
certified using appendix D1.
Based on the discussion that follows, DOE has tentatively
determined that these proposed amendments to the clothes dryer test
procedures would not be unduly burdensome for manufacturers to conduct.
DOE requests comment on its initial determination that there would
be no impact or costs to clothes dryer manufacturers under the proposed
amendments to appendix D1 and appendix D2.
a. Maintaining Hourly Btu Rating for Gas Clothes Dryers
DOE proposes to specify the order of adjustment, from least
burdensome to most burdensome, for the three types of adjustments that
can be made to maintain the required heat input rate for natural gas
and propane clothes dryers. As described, this proposed amendment is
generally consistent with industry practice. To the extent that any
deviations from this order may occur in practice, the additional
direction provided by the proposed amendments would not require any
manufacturers to retest or re-certify any basic models currently on the
market, because the net result of maintaining the hourly Btu rating
within 5 percent of the rated value would not change;
therefore, drying performance would not be impacted in comparison to
results obtained under the current test procedures.
b. Final RMC Requirement
DOE proposes to explicitly specify that any second test run using
the highest dryness level setting must result in a final RMC of 2
percent or less for the test to be considered valid. This amendment
impacts only appendix D2, and therefore would have no impact on testing
under appendix D1. As described, this amendment reflects the current
practice of manufacturers and test laboratories, and therefore would
not impact the cost of testing.
c. Additional Amendments
DOE has initially determined that the remainder of the amendments
proposed in this NOPR would not impact test costs.
DOE proposes to provide additional direction on the dryness level
setting for clothes dryers that provide an even number of discrete
dryness settings. This amendment impacts only appendix
[[Page 35500]]
D2, and therefore would have no impact on testing under appendix D1.
DOE proposes revisions regarding the measurement and accounting of
standby mode and off mode power. DOE has initially determined that
these proposed revisions would potentially reduce testing costs for
third-party laboratories, as the proposal would not require any
disassembly of a clothes dryer to determine the appropriate application
of the test procedure. However, DOE has not quantified the potential
reduction in testing cost.
DOE proposes a variety of formatting and typographical corrections
to both appendix D1 and appendix D2. These edits would remove confusion
that may result from the errors and improve the readability of the test
procedures.
DOE proposes amendments to 10 CFR 430.23(d) to include instructions
for calculating estimated annual operating cost, CEF, and other useful
metrics using appendix D2. These metrics are based on calculations
using results generated under testing according to appendix D2, so no
additional testing would be required. DOE estimates that the total cost
of these calculations would be negligible for manufacturers.
Manufacturers would be able to rely on data generated under the
current test procedure, should any of these additional proposed
amendments be finalized.
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
The test procedures for clothes dryers in appendix D1 and appendix
D2 incorporate by reference AHAM HLD-1-2009, ``Household Tumble Type
Clothes Dryers,'' (which was later certified as ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010)
and IEC Standard 62301. Specifically, both appendices reference an
exhaust simulator specified in AHAM HLD-1-2009 in their test setup
instructions, and incorporate IEC Standard 62301, which provides test
conditions, testing equipment, and methods for measuring standby mode
and off mode power consumption. Appendices D1 and D2 also require the
use of AHAM Standard Test Detergent Formula 3 for the procedure for
preconditioning the test cloths. DOE has initially determined that the
proposed revisions to the standby and off mode power provisions would
not change the existing references to industry standards.
Industry standards address cycle selection differently from the DOE
test procedure. ANSI/AHAM HLD-1-2010 specifies that the test cycle be
run using the maximum temperature setting without allowing the clothes
dryer to advance into the cool down period. If the required final
moisture content (6 percent) cannot be met using this setting, a new
test run must be conducted using a different user-selected setting that
will achieve the target final moisture content. IEC Standard 61121
requires that the test cycle for a given load composition be run using
the cycle program and settings specified in the manufacturer's
instructions to achieve a target final moisture content, which is based
on the test load composition. In the absence of any instructions from
the manufacturer, or if the specified cycle program and settings do not
achieve the required final moisture content, then the test shall be run
using a user-selected combination of cycle program and settings that
will achieve the required final moisture content.
Because each test method described above specifies a different set
of cycle settings and test parameters, the measured efficiency of a
clothes dryer may differ depending on which test method is used. As a
result, the efficiency measured using these industry test standards may
not be directly comparable to the efficiency measured using DOE's test
procedure, on which the energy conservation standards are based.
DOE requests comment on the benefits and burdens of adopting any
industry/voluntary consensus-based or other appropriate test procedure,
without modification.
3. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE
welcomes comment on any other aspect of the existing test procedure for
clothes dryers not already addressed by the specific areas identified
in this document. DOE particularly seeks information that would ensure
that the test procedure measures the energy use of the clothes dryer
during a representative use cycle or period of use, as well as
information that would help DOE create a procedure that is not unduly
burdensome to conduct. Comments regarding repeatability and
reproducibility are also welcome.
DOE also requests information that would help DOE create procedures
that would limit manufacturer test burden through streamlining or
simplifying testing requirements. In particular, DOE notes that under
Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,'' Executive Branch agencies such as DOE must manage the costs
associated with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with
Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017) (Executive Order
13771 ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'').
Consistent with that Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to
provide input on measures DOE could take to lower the cost of its
regulations applicable to clothes dryers consistent with the
requirements of EPCA.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has determined that
this test procedure rulemaking does not constitute a ``significant
regulatory action'' 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 Executive Order 13771 and 13777
On January 30, 2017, the President issued Executive Order
(``E.O.'') 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs.'' E.O. 13771 stated the policy of the executive branch is to be
prudent and financially responsible in the expenditure of funds, from
both public and private sources. E.O. 13771 stated it is essential to
manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private
expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017, the President issued E.O.
13777, ``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda.'' E.O. 13777 required
the head of each agency designate an agency official as its Regulatory
Reform Officer (``RRO''). Each RRO oversees the implementation of
regulatory reform initiatives and policies to ensure that agencies
effectively carry out regulatory reforms, consistent with applicable
law. Further, E.O. 13777 requires the establishment of a regulatory
task force at each agency. The regulatory task force is required to
make recommendations to the agency head regarding the repeal,
replacement, or modification of existing regulations, consistent with
applicable law. At a minimum, each regulatory reform task force must
attempt to identify regulations that:
(i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;
(ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;
(iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with
regulatory reform initiatives and policies;
[[Page 35501]]
(v) Are inconsistent with the requirements of Information Quality
Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to that Act, in particular those
regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or
methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently
transparent to meet the standard for reproducibility; or
(vi) Derive from or implement Executive Orders or other
Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or
substantially modified.
DOE initially concludes that this rulemaking, as described in
Sections II and III of the preamble, is consistent with the directives
set forth in these executive orders. DOE has initially determined that
the proposed rule would not yield any costs or costs savings.
Therefore, if finalized as proposed, this rule is expected to be an
E.O. 13771 other action.
C. 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 (``IRFA'')
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 website: http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
DOE reviewed this proposed rule under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. DOE has tentatively concluded that this proposed
rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The factual basis for this determination is as follows:
The Small Business Administration (``SBA'') considers a business
entity to be a small business, if, together with its affiliates, it
employs less than a threshold number of workers or earns less than the
average annual receipts specified in 13 CFR part 121. The threshold
values set forth in these regulations use size standards and codes
established by the North American Industry Classification System
(``NAICS'') that are available at: https://www.sba.gov/document/
support--table-size-standards. The threshold number for NAICS
classification code 335220, major household appliance manufacturing,
which includes clothes dryer manufacturers, is 1,500 employees.
Most of the manufacturers supplying clothes dryers are large
multinational corporations. DOE collected data from DOE's compliance
certification database \41\ and surveyed the AHAM member directory to
identify manufacturers of clothes dryers. DOE then consulted publicly-
available data, purchased company reports from vendors such as Dun and
Bradstreet, and contacted manufacturers, where needed, to determine if
they meet the SBA's definition of a ``small business manufacturing
facility'' and have their manufacturing facilities located within the
United States. Based on this analysis, DOE did not identify any small
businesses that manufacture clothes dryers covered by the proposed test
procedure amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ http://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (Last
accessed February 2, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, as described in section III.N.1 of this document, the
amendments proposed in this test procedure would not increase costs to
clothes dryer manufacturers. Therefore, DOE tentatively concludes that
the impacts of the test procedure amendments proposed in this NOPR
would not have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities,'' and that the preparation of an IRFA is not
warranted. DOE will transmit the certification and supporting statement
of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
DOE requests comment on its findings that there are no small
businesses that manufacture clothes dryers in the United States, and on
DOE's conclusion that the rule would not increase costs to clothes
dryer manufacturers.
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of clothes dryers must certify to DOE that their
products comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. To
certify compliance, manufacturers must first obtain test data for their
products according to the DOE test procedures, including any amendments
adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for
the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered
consumer products and commercial equipment, including clothes dryers.
(See generally 10 CFR part 429.) The collection-of-information
requirement for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to
review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA'').
This requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control number
1910-1400. Public reporting burden for the certification is estimated
to average 35 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.
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.
E. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
DOE is analyzing this proposed regulation in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and DOE's NEPA
implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE's regulations include
a categorical exclusion for rulemakings interpreting or amending an
existing rule or regulation that does not change the environmental
effect of the rule or regulation being amended. 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D, Appendix A5. DOE anticipates that this rulemaking qualifies
for categorical exclusion A5 because it is an interpretive rulemaking
that does not change the environmental effect of the rule and otherwise
meets the requirements for application of a categorical exclusion. See
10 CFR 1021.410. DOE will complete its NEPA review before issuing the
final rule.
F. 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
[[Page 35502]]
March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the
development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this
proposed rule and has determined that it would 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 proposed
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.
G. 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,
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.
H. 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 proposed regulatory action likely to result 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 12820; also available
at http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this
proposed 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.
I. 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 rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the
family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not
necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
J. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation would not
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
K. 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 proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
The proposed regulatory action to amend the test procedure for
measuring the energy efficiency of clothes dryers 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
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.
M. 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
[[Page 35503]]
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.
DOE is not proposing to require the use of any new commercial
standards in this NOPR, so these requirements do not apply.
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
The time and date of the webinar are listed in the DATES section at
the beginning of this document. If no participants register for the
webinar then it will be cancelled. Webinar registration information,
participant instructions, and information about the capabilities
available to webinar participants will be published on DOE's website:
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=50&action=viewlive. Participants are
responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible with the webinar
software.
Additionally, you may request an in-person meeting to be held prior
to the close of the request period provided in the DATES section of
this document. Requests for an in-person meeting may be made by
contacting Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202)
287-1445 or by email: [email protected].
B. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by
September 23, 2019, comments and information on matters addressed in
this notice and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of
amended test procedures for clothes dryers.
Submitting comments via http://www.regualtions.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties,
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names,
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any
documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to http://www.regulations.gov information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'')). Comments submitted
through http://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments
received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the
information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through http://www.regulations.gov
before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of
being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being
processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to
several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that http://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail also will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment
or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand
delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is
not necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses.
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature
of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies:
One copy of the document marked confidential including all the
information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document
marked non-confidential with the information believed to be
confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email to
[email protected] or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will
make its own determination about the confidential status of the
information and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include (1) a description of the
items, (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry, (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources, (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality, (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure, (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time, and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information
[[Page 35504]]
provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of
the process for developing test procedures and energy conservation
standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of
the public during the comment period in each stage of this process.
Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced
discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who
wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices
and information about this process should contact Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at
[email protected].
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of
interested parties concerning the following issues:
(1) To ensure that the test procedure measures energy use during a
representative average use cycle or period of use, DOE continues to
seek consumer usage data (e.g., load composition and sizes, cycle
selections, RMC, cycles per year) that are representative of the entire
United States over the course of a year. DOE requests data on how
frequently consumers select different cycle programs, temperature
settings, dryness settings, and other settings that could impact energy
use (e.g., ``eco mode''). DOE seeks data on representative load
compositions (materials, fabric, weave, etc.) and sizes, as well as the
corresponding cycle selections chosen by consumers for each particular
load. DOE also seeks consumer usage data on initial RMC and consumer-
acceptable final RMC levels for varying load compositions/sizes and
cycle selections.
(2) DOE seeks comment on whether requiring the drying temperature
setting to be set to the maximum, if it can be chosen independently of
the program, is representative of the energy use of the clothes dryer
during a representative use cycle or period of use, or whether a lower
temperature setting would meet this statutory criterion. DOE also seeks
comment on whether a 2-percent final RMC under DOE test conditions is
representative of the energy use during an average use cycle or period
of use for clothes dryers with automatic termination controls, or
whether a different RMC meets this statutory criterion; and on whether
any other test conditions should be revised so that the test procedure
meets the applicable EPCA requirements.
(3) DOE seeks comment on the proposal to specify that units with
network capabilities be tested with the network-connected functions in
the ``off'' position and on the issues presented in the September 2018
RFI as they may be applicable to clothes dryers.
(4) DOE requests feedback on its characterization of connected
clothes dryers currently on the market. Specifically, DOE requests
input on the types of features or functionality enabled by connected
clothes dryers that exist on the market or that are under development.
(5) DOE requests data on the percentage of users purchasing
connected clothes dryers, and, for those users, the percentage of the
time when the connected functionality of the clothes dryer is used.
(6) DOE requests feedback on the types of impacts that should be
included in any future assessments of features associated with
connected clothes dryers.
(7) DOE requests data on the amount of additional or reduced energy
use of connected clothes dryers.
(8) DOE requests data on the pattern of additional or reduced
energy use of connected clothes dryers; for example, whether it is
constant, periodic, or triggered by the user.
(9) DOE requests information on any existing testing protocols that
account for connected features of clothes dryers, as well as any
testing protocols that may be under development within the industry.
(10) DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify that the order
of adjustment for maintaining the hourly Btu rating within
specification is as follows: (first) adjust the supply gas pressure,
(second) adjust the pressure regulator setpoint, or (third) modify the
orifice as necessary.
(11) DOE requests comments on whether the order of sections within
the test procedure reflects the order in which test laboratories
perform the test. Specifically, DOE requests comments on whether
performing the standby mode and off mode testing after the active mode
testing reflects current practice by test laboratories.
(12) DOE requests comments on its proposal to amend the methods for
measuring inactive mode and off mode power consumption of clothes
dryers.
(13) DOE requests comments on its proposal to specify explicitly
that any second test run using the highest dryness level setting must
result in a final RMC of 2 percent or less for the test to be
considered valid, and its proposal to amend the nomenclature of
sections 4.1 through 4.4 of appendix D2 to clarify that the measured
energy consumption represented by Ece, Ege,
Egg, and Ecg, respectively, reflects the energy
required to achieve a final RMC of 2 percent or less. DOE also requests
comment on whether a different final RMC would more appropriately
represent the consumer-acceptable end point of an average use cycle.
(14) DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify the dryness
setting for clothes dryers that provide an even number of discrete
dryness settings that can be chosen independently of the program.
(15) DOE requests comment on its proposal to allow for calculating
each useful measure of energy consumption in 10 CFR 430.23(d) using
appendix D2, to accommodate clothes dryers that are optionally tested
using appendix D2. DOE also requests comment on its proposal to include
a new method for calculating estimated annual energy use of a clothes
dryer.
(16) DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of its proposed
rounding requirements of all numeric reported values and estimated
annual operating cost for clothes dryers.
(17) DOE requests comment on any potential unintended consequences
of its proposals regarding minor typographical corrections and
formatting modifications.
(18) DOE requests comment on its proposal to remove appendix D and
all associated references throughout 10 CFR 429.21 and 10 CFR
430.23(d).
(19) DOE requests comment on its initial determination that there
would be no impact or costs to clothes dryer manufacturers under the
proposed amendments to appendix D1 and appendix D2.
(20) DOE requests comment on the benefits and burdens of adopting
any industry/voluntary consensus-based or other appropriate test
procedure, without modification.
(21) In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document,
DOE welcomes comment on any other aspect of the existing test procedure
for clothes dryers not already addressed by the specific areas
identified in this document. DOE particularly seeks information that
would ensure that the test procedure measures the energy use of the
clothes dryer during a representative use cycle or period of use, as
well as information that would help DOE create a procedure that is not
unduly burdensome to conduct.
[[Page 35505]]
Comments regarding repeatability and reproducibility are also welcome.
(22) DOE also requests information that would help DOE create
procedures that would limit manufacturer test burden through
streamlining or simplifying testing requirements. In particular, DOE
notes that under Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs,'' Executive Branch agencies such as DOE
must manage the costs associated with the imposition of expenditures
required to comply with Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3,
2017) (Executive Order 13771 ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs''). Consistent with that Executive Order, DOE
encourages the public to provide input on measures DOE could take to
lower the cost of its regulations applicable to clothes dryers
consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
(23) DOE requests comment on its findings that there are no small
businesses that manufacture clothes dryers in the United States, and on
DOE's conclusion that the rule would not increase costs to clothes
dryer manufacturers.
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this proposed
rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.
Signed in Washington, DC, on June 28, 2019.
Alexander N. Fitzsimmons,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
parts 429 and 430 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
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; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Section 429.21 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(2); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (c).
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 429.21 Residential clothes dryers.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Pursuant to Sec. 429.12(b)(13), a certification report shall
include the following public product-specific information: When using
appendix D1, the combined energy factor in pounds per kilowatt hours
(lb/kWh), the capacity in cubic feet (cu ft), the voltage in volts (V)
(for electric dryers only), an indication if the dryer has automatic
termination controls, and the hourly Btu rating of the burner (for gas
dryers only); when using appendix D2, the combined energy factor in
pounds per kilowatt hours (lb/kWh), the capacity in cubic feet (cu ft),
the voltage in volts (V) (for electric dryers only), an indication if
the dryer has automatic termination controls, the hourly Btu rating of
the burner (for gas dryers only), and a list of the cycle setting
selections for the energy test cycle as recorded in section 3.4.7 of
appendix D2 to subpart B of part 430.
(c) Reported values. Values reported pursuant to this section must
be rounded as follows: CEF to the nearest 0.01 lb/kWh, capacity to the
nearest 0.1 cu ft, voltage to the nearest V, and hourly Btu rating to
the nearest Btu.
PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
0
3. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
4. Section 430.23 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 430.23 Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water
consumption.
* * * * *
(d) Clothes dryers. (1) The estimated annual energy consumption for
clothes dryers, expressed in kilowatt-hours per year, is the product of
283 cycles per year and the per-cycle combined total energy consumption
in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to section 4.6 of
appendix D1 or section 4.6 of appendix D2 to this subpart, as
appropriate.
(2) The estimated annual operating cost for clothes dryers shall
be--
(i) For an electric clothes dryer, the product of the following
three factors, with the resulting product then being rounded off to the
nearest dollar per year:
(A) 283 cycles per year,
(B) The per-cycle combined total energy consumption in kilowatt-
hours per cycle, determined according to section 4.6 of appendix D1 or
section 4.6 of appendix D2 to this subpart, as appropriate, and
(C) The representative average unit cost of electrical energy in
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary; and
(ii) For a gas clothes dryer, the product of 283 cycles per year
times the sum of the following three factors, with the resulting
product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year:
(A) The product of the per-cycle gas dryer electric energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to
section 4.2 of appendix D1 or section 4.2 of appendix D2 to this
subpart, as appropriate, times the representative average unit cost of
electrical energy in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the
Secretary, plus,
(B) The product of the per-cycle gas dryer gas energy consumption,
in Btus per cycle, determined according to section 4.3 of appendix D1
or section 4.3 of appendix D2 to this subpart, as appropriate, times
the representative average unit cost for natural gas or propane, as
appropriate, in dollars per Btu as provided by the Secretary, plus,
(C) The product of the per-cycle standby mode and off mode energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined according to
section 4.5 of appendix D1 or section 4.5 of appendix D2 to this
subpart, as appropriate, times the representative average unit cost of
electrical energy in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the
Secretary.
(3) The combined energy factor, expressed in pounds per kilowatt-
hour is determined in accordance with section 4.7 of appendix D1 or
section 4.7 of appendix D2 to this subpart, as appropriate, the result
then being rounded off to the nearest hundredth (0.01).
(4) Other useful measures of energy consumption for clothes dryers
shall be those measures of energy consumption
[[Page 35506]]
for clothes dryers which the Secretary determines are likely to assist
consumers in making purchasing decisions and which are derived from the
application of appendix D1 or appendix D2 to this subpart, as
appropriate.
* * * * *
Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 430--[Removed]
0
5. Appendix D to subpart B of part 430 is removed.
0
6. Appendix D1 to subpart B of part 430 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory note;
0
b. In section 1.5, removing the word ``clothes'' and adding in its
place ``cloths'';
0
c. Removing sections 1.7, 1.14, and 1.18;
0
d. Redesignating sections 1.8 through 1.13 as 1.7 through 1.12,
sections 1.15 through 1.17 as 1.13 through 1.15, and section 1.19 as
1.17;
0
e. Adding new section 1.16;
0
f. Revising the first sentence of section 2.1.1;
0
g. Revising the first sentence of section 2.1.3;
0
h. Revising sections 2.1.2, 2.3.2.1, 2.3.2.2, 2.7.1, 2.7.2 and 2.8.1;
0
i. Adding new section 2.3.2.3;
0
j. Redesignating section 2.4.1 as 2.4.1.1;
0
k. Adding new section 2.4.1;
0
l. In section 2.6, removing the word ``clothes'' and adding in its
place ``cloths'';
0
m. In section 3.1, in the last sentence, adding the text ``to the
nearest 0.1 cubic foot'' following ``is calculated'';
0
n. Revising sections 3.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.6, 3.6.1 and 3.6.2;
0
o. Adding new sections 3.6.3 and 3.6.4;
0
p. Revising sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.5;
0
q. Removing section 4.7; and
0
r. Redesignating section 4.8 as 4.7.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Appendix D1 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers
Note: The procedures in either appendix D1 or appendix D2 may be
used to determine compliance with energy conservation standards for
clothes dryers. Manufacturers must use a single appendix for all
representations, including certifications of compliance, and may not
use appendix D1 for certain representations and appendix D2 for
other representations.
* * * * *
1.16 ``Vented clothes dryer'' means a clothes dryer that
exhausts the evaporated moisture from the cabinet.
* * * * *
2.1.1 All clothes dryers. For both vented clothes dryers and
ventless clothes dryers, install the clothes dryer in accordance
with manufacturer's instructions as shipped with the unit. * * *
2.1.2 Vented clothes dryers. For vented clothes dryers, the
dryer exhaust shall be restricted by adding the AHAM exhaust
simulator described in section 3.3.5.1 of AHAM HLD-1 (incorporated
by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.1.3 Ventless clothes dryers. For ventless clothes dryers, the
dryer shall be tested without the AHAM exhaust simulator. * * *
* * * * *
2.3.2.1 Natural gas supply. Maintain the gas supply to the
clothes dryer immediately ahead of all controls at a pressure of 7
to 10 inches of water column. The natural gas supplied should have a
heating value of approximately 1,025 Btus per standard cubic foot.
The actual heating value, Hn2, in Btus per standard cubic
foot, for the natural gas to be used in the test shall be obtained
either from measurements using a standard continuous flow
calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 of this appendix or by the
purchase of bottled natural gas whose Btu rating is certified to be
at least as accurate a rating as could be obtained from measurements
with a standard continuous flow calorimeter as described in section
2.4.6 of this appendix.
2.3.2.2. Propane gas supply. Maintain the gas supply to the
clothes dryer immediately ahead of all controls at a pressure of 11
to 13 inches of water column. The propane gas supplied should have a
heating value of approximately 2,500 Btus per standard cubic foot.
The actual heating value, Hp, in Btus per standard cubic
foot, for the propane gas to be used in the test shall be obtained
either from measurements using a standard continuous flow
calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 of this appendix or by the
purchase of bottled gas whose Btu rating is certified to be at least
as accurate a rating as could be obtained from measurement with a
standard continuous calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 of
this appendix.
2.3.2.3. Hourly Btu Rating. Maintain the hourly Btu rating of
the burner within 5 percent of the rating specified by
the manufacturer. If the hourly Btu rating of the burner cannot be
maintained within 5 percent of the rating specified by
the manufacturer, make adjustments in the following order until an
hourly Btu rating of the burner within 5 percent of the
rating specified by the manufacturer is achieved:
(1) Modify the gas inlet supply pressure within the allowable
range specified in section 2.3.2.1 or 2.3.2.2 of this appendix, as
applicable;
(2) If the clothes dryer is equipped with a gas pressure
regulator, modify the outlet pressure of the gas pressure regulator
within 10 percent of the value recommended by the
manufacturer in the installation manual, on the nameplate sticker,
or wherever the manufacturer makes such a recommendation for the
basic model; and
(3) Modify the orifice as necessary to achieve the required
hourly Btu rating.
* * * * *
2.4.1 Weighing scales.
* * * * *
2.7.1 Load size. Determine the load size for the unit under
test, according to Table 1.
Table 1--Test Loads
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit under test Test load (bone dry weight)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard size clothes dryer................... 8.45 pounds .085 pounds.
Compact size clothes dryer.................... 3.00 pounds .03 pounds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each test load must consist of energy test cloths and no more
than five energy stuffer cloths.
2.7.2 Test load preparation. Dampen the load by agitating it in
water whose temperature is 60 [deg]F 5 [deg]F and
consists of 0 to 17 parts per million hardness for approximately 2
minutes in order to saturate the fabric. Then, extract water from
the wet test load by spinning the load until the moisture content of
the load is between 54.0-61.0 percent of the bone-dry weight of the
test load.
* * * * *
2.8.1 Vented clothes dryers. For vented clothes dryers, before
any test cycle, operate the dryer without a test load in the non-
heat mode for 15 minutes or until the discharge air temperature is
varying less than 1 [deg]F for 10 minutes--whichever is longer--in
the test installation location with the ambient conditions within
the specified test condition tolerances of section 2.2 of this
appendix.
* * * * *
3.3 Test cycle. Operate the clothes dryer at the maximum
temperature setting and, if equipped with a timer, at the maximum
time setting. Any other optional cycle settings that do not affect
the temperature or time settings shall be tested in the as-shipped
position, except that if the clothes dryer has network capabilities,
the network settings must be disabled throughout testing. If the
clothes dryer does not have a separate temperature setting selection
on the control panel, the maximum time setting should be used for
the drying test cycle. Dry the load until the moisture content of
the test load is between
[[Page 35507]]
2.5 and 5.0 percent of the bone-dry weight of the test load, at
which point the test cycle is stopped, but do not permit the dryer
to advance into cool down. If required, reset the timer to increase
the length of the drying cycle. After stopping the test cycle,
remove and weigh the test load. The clothes dryer shall not be
stopped intermittently in the middle of the test cycle for any
reason. Record the data specified by section 3.4 of this appendix.
If the dryer automatically stops during a cycle because the
condensation box is full of water, the test is stopped, and the test
run is invalid, in which case the condensation box shall be emptied
and the test re-run from the beginning. For ventless clothes dryers,
during the time between two cycles, the door of the dryer shall be
closed except for loading and unloading.
* * * * *
3.4.1 Bone-dry weight of the test load, Wbonedry, as
described in section 2.7.1 of this appendix.
3.4.2 Moisture content of the wet test load before the test,
MCw, as described in section 2.7.2 of this appendix.
3.4.3 Moisture content of the dry test load obtained after the
test, MCd, as described in section 3.3 of this appendix.
* * * * *
3.6 Standby mode and off mode power. Connect the clothes dryer
to a watt meter as specified in section 2.4.7 of this appendix.
Establish the testing conditions set forth in section 2 of this
appendix.
3.6.1 Perform standby mode and off mode testing after completion
of an active mode drying cycle included as part of the test cycle;
after removing the test load; without changing the control panel
settings used for the active mode drying cycle; with the door
closed; and without disconnecting the electrical energy supply to
the clothes dryer between completion of the active mode drying cycle
and the start of standby mode and off mode testing.
3.6.2 For clothes dryers that take some time to automatically
enter a stable inactive mode or off mode state from a higher power
state as discussed in Section 5, Paragraph 5.1, Note 1 of IEC 62301
(Second Edition) (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3), allow
sufficient time for the clothes dryer to automatically reach the
default inactive/off mode state before proceeding with the test
measurement.
3.6.3 Once the stable inactive/off mode state has been reached,
measure and record the default inactive/off mode power,
Pdefault, in watts, following the test procedure for the
sampling method specified in Section 5, Paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301
(Second Edition) (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
3.6.4 For a clothes dryer with a switch (or other means) that
can be optionally selected by the end user to achieve a lower-power
inactive/off mode state than the default inactive/off mode state
measured in section 3.6.3 of this appendix, after performing the
measurement in section 3.6.3 of this appendix, activate the switch
(or other means) to the position resulting in the lowest power
consumption and repeat the measurement procedure described in
section 3.6.3 of this appendix. Measure and record the lowest
inactive/off mode power, Plowest, in watts.
* * * * *
4.1 Total per-cycle electric dryer energy consumption. Calculate
the total electric dryer energy consumption per cycle,
Ece, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined
as:
Ece = [53.5/(MCw-MCd)] x
Et x field use,
Where:
Et = the energy recorded in section 3.4.5 of this
appendix.
53.5 = an experimentally established value for the percent reduction
in the moisture content of the test load during a laboratory test
cycle expressed as a percent.
field use = field use factor,
= 1.18 for clothes dryers with time termination control systems only
without any automatic termination control functions.
= 1.04 for clothes dryers with automatic control systems that meet
the requirements of the definition for automatic termination control
in section 1.4 of this appendix, including those that also have a
supplementary timer control, or that may also be manually
controlled.
MCw = the moisture content of the wet test load as
recorded in section 3.4.2 of this appendix.
MCd = the moisture content of the dry test load as
recorded in section 3.4.3 of this appendix.
4.2 Per-cycle gas dryer electrical energy consumption. Calculate
the gas dryer electrical energy consumption per cycle,
Ege, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined
as:
Ege = [53.5/(MCw-MCd)] x
Ete x field use,
Where:
Ete = the energy recorded in section 3.4.6.1 of this
appendix.
field use, 53.5, MCw, and MCd as defined in
section 4.1 of this appendix.
4.3 Per-cycle gas dryer gas energy consumption. Calculate the
gas dryer gas energy consumption per cycle, Egg,
expressed in Btus per cycle and defined as:
Egg = [53.5/(MCw-MCd)] x
Etg x field use x GEF
Where:
Etg = the energy recorded in section 3.4.6.2 of this
appendix.
GEF = corrected gas heat value (Btu per cubic feet) as defined in
section 3.4.6.3 of this appendix.
field use, 53.5, MCw, and MCd as defined in
section 4.1 of this appendix.
* * * * *
4.5 Per-cycle standby mode and off mode energy consumption.
Calculate the clothes dryer per-cycle standby mode and off mode
energy consumption, ETSO, expressed in kilowatt-hours per
cycle and defined as:
ETSO = [(Pdefault x Sdefault) +
(Plowest x Slowest)] x K/283
Where:
Pdefault = Default inactive/off mode power, in watts, as
measured in section 3.6.3 of this appendix.
Plowest = Lowest inactive/off mode power, in watts, as
measured in section 3.6.4 of this appendix for clothes dryer with a
switch (or other means) that can be optionally selected by the end
user to achieve a lower-power inactive/off mode than the default
inactive/off mode; otherwise, Plowest=0.
Sdefault = Annual hours in default inactive/off mode,
defined as 8,620 if no optional lowest-power inactive/off mode is
available; otherwise 4,310.
Slowest = Annual hours in lowest-power inactive/off mode,
defined as 0 if no optional lowest-power inactive/off mode is
available; otherwise 4,310.
K = Conversion factor of watt-hours to kilowatt-hours = 0.001.
283 = Representative average number of clothes dryer cycles in a
year.
8,620 = Combined annual hours for inactive and off mode.
4,310 = One-half of the combined annual hours for inactive and off
mode.
* * * * *
0
7. Appendix D2 to subpart B of part 430 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory note;
0
b. In section 1.6, removing the word ``clothes'' and adding in its
place ``cloths'';
0
c. Removing sections 1.8, 1.15, and 1.19;
0
d. Redesignating sections 1.9 through 1.14 as 1.8 through 1.13,
sections 1.16 through 1.18 as 1.14 through 1.16, section 1.20 as 1.17,
and section 1.21 as 1.19;
0
e. Adding new section 1.18;
0
f. In newly redesignated section 1.14, removing the word
``clasification'' and adding in its place ``classification'';
0
g. Revising the first sentence of section 2.1.1;
0
h. Revising the first sentence of section 2.1.3;
0
i. Revising sections 2.1.2, 2.3.2.1, 2.3.2.2, 2.7.1, 2.7.2, and 2.8.1;
0
j. Adding new section 2.3.2.3;
0
k. Redesignating, section 2.4.1 as 2.4.1.1;
0
l. Adding new section 2.4.1;
0
m. In section 3.1, in the last sentence, adding the text ``to the
nearest 0.1 cubic foot'' following ``is calculated'';
0
n. Revising sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2, and 3.4.1, 3.4.2 and 3.4.3;
0
o. Removing section 3.5;
0
p. Redesignating sections 3.6, 3.6.1, and 3.6.2 as 3.5, 3.5.1, and
3.5.2, respectively;
0
q. Revising newly redesignated sections 3.5, 3.5.1, 3.5.2;
0
r. Adding new sections 3.5.3 and 3.5.4;
0
s. Revising sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5;
0
t. Removing section 4.7; and
[[Page 35508]]
0
u. Redesignating section 4.8 as 4.7.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Appendix D2 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryer
Note: The procedures in either appendix D1 or appendix D2 may
be used to determine compliance with energy conservation standards
for clothes dryers. Manufacturers must use a single appendix for all
representations, including certifications of compliance, and may not
use appendix D1 for certain representations and appendix D2 for
other representations.
* * * * *
1.18 ``Vented clothes dryer'' means a clothes dryer that
exhausts the evaporated moisture from the cabinet.
* * * * *
2.1.1 All clothes dryers. For both vented clothes dryers and
ventless clothes dryers, install the clothes dryer in accordance
with manufacturer's instructions as shipped with the unit. * * *
2.1.2 Vented clothes dryers. For vented clothes dryers, the
dryer exhaust shall be restricted by adding the AHAM exhaust
simulator described in section 3.3.5.1 of AHAM HLD-1 (incorporated
by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
2.1.3 Ventless clothes dryers. For ventless clothes dryers, the
dryer shall be tested without the AHAM exhaust simulator.* * *
* * * * *
2.3.2.1 Natural gas supply. Maintain the gas supply to the
clothes dryer immediately ahead of all controls at a pressure of 7
to 10 inches of water column. The natural gas supplied should have a
heating value of approximately 1,025 Btus per standard cubic foot.
The actual heating value, Hn2, in Btus per standard cubic
foot, for the natural gas to be used in the test shall be obtained
either from measurements using a standard continuous flow
calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 of this appendix or by the
purchase of bottled natural gas whose Btu rating is certified to be
at least as accurate a rating as could be obtained from measurements
with a standard continuous flow calorimeter as described in section
2.4.6 of this appendix.
2.3.2.2. Propane gas supply. Maintain the gas supply to the
clothes dryer immediately ahead of all controls at a pressure of 11
to 13 inches of water column. The propane gas supplied should have a
heating value of approximately 2,500 Btus per standard cubic foot.
The actual heating value, Hp, in Btus per standard cubic
foot, for the propane gas to be used in the test shall be obtained
either from measurements using a standard continuous flow
calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 of this appendix or by the
purchase of bottled gas whose Btu rating is certified to be at least
as accurate a rating as could be obtained from measurement with a
standard continuous calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 of
this appendix.
2.3.2.3. Hourly Btu Rating. Maintain the hourly Btu rating of
the burner within 5 percent of the rating specified by
the manufacturer. If the hourly Btu rating of the burner cannot be
maintained within 5 percent of the rating specified by
the manufacturer, make adjustments in the following order until an
hourly Btu rating of the burner within 5 percent of the
rating specified by the manufacturer is achieved:
(1) Modify the gas inlet supply pressure within the allowable
range specified in section 2.3.2.1 or 2.3.2.2 of this appendix, as
applicable;
(2) If the clothes dryer is equipped with a gas pressure
regulator, modify the outlet pressure of the gas pressure regulator
within 10 percent of the value recommended by the
manufacturer in the installation manual, on the nameplate sticker,
or wherever the manufacturer makes such a recommendation for the
basic model; and
(3) Modify the orifice as necessary to achieve the required
hourly Btu rating.
* * * * *
2.4.1 Weighing scales.
* * * * *
2.7.1 Load size. Determine the load size for the unit under
test, according to Table 1.
Table 1--Test Loads
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit under test Test load (bone dry weight)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard size clothes dryer................... 8.45 pounds .085 pounds.
Compact size clothes dryer.................... 3.00 pounds .03 pounds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each test load must consist of energy test cloths and no more
than five energy stuffer cloths.
2.7.2 Test load preparation. Dampen the load by agitating it in
water whose temperature is 60 [deg]F 5 [deg]F and
consists of 0 to 17 parts per million hardness for approximately 2
minutes to saturate the fabric. Then, extract water from the wet
test load by spinning the load until the moisture content of the
load is between 52.5 and 57.5 percent of the bone-dry weight of the
test load. Make a final mass adjustment, such that the moisture
content is 57.5 percent 0.33 percent by adding water
uniformly distributed among all of the test cloths in a very fine
spray using a spray bottle.
* * * * *
2.8.1 Vented clothes dryers. For vented clothes dryers, before
any test cycle, operate the dryer without a test load in the non-
heat mode for 15 minutes or until the discharge air temperature is
varying less than 1 [deg]F for 10 minutes--whichever is longer--in
the test installation location with the ambient conditions within
the specified test condition tolerances of section 2.2 of this
appendix.
* * * * *
3.3.1 Timer dryers. For timer dryers, operate the clothes dryer
at the maximum temperature setting and, if equipped with a timer, at
the maximum time setting. Any other optional cycle settings that do
not affect the temperature or time settings shall be tested in the
as-shipped position, except that if the clothes dryer has network
capabilities, the network settings must be disabled throughout
testing. If the clothes dryer does not have a separate temperature
setting selection on the control panel, the maximum time setting
should be used for the drying test cycle. Dry the load until the
moisture content of the test load is between 1 and 2.5 percent of
the bone-dry weight of the test load, at which point the test cycle
is stopped, but do not permit the dryer to advance into cool down.
If required, reset the timer to increase the length of the drying
cycle. After stopping the test cycle, remove and weigh the test
load. The clothes dryer shall not be stopped intermittently in the
middle of the test cycle for any reason. Record the data specified
by section 3.4 of this appendix. If the dryer automatically stops
during a cycle because the condensation box is full of water, the
test is stopped, and the test run is invalid, in which case the
condensation box shall be emptied and the test re-run from the
beginning. For ventless clothes dryers, during the time between two
cycles, the door of the dryer shall be closed except for loading and
unloading.
3.3.2 Automatic termination control dryers. For automatic
termination control dryers, a ``normal'' program shall be selected
for the test cycle. For dryers that do not have a ``normal''
program, the cycle recommended by the manufacturer for drying cotton
or linen clothes shall be selected. Where the drying temperature
setting can be chosen independently of the program, it shall be set
to the maximum. Where the dryness level setting can be chosen
independently of the program, it shall be set to the ``normal'' or
``medium'' dryness level setting. If such designation is not
provided, then the dryness level shall be set at the mid-point
between the minimum and maximum settings. If an even number of
discrete settings are provided, use the next-highest setting above
the midpoint, in the direction of the maximum dryness setting [or
lowest setting below the midpoint, in the direction of the minimum
dryness setting]. Any other optional cycle settings that do not
affect the program, temperature or dryness settings shall be tested
in the as-shipped position, except that if the clothes dryer has
network capabilities, the network settings must be disabled
throughout testing.
[[Page 35509]]
Operate the clothes dryer until the completion of the programmed
cycle, including the cool down period. The cycle shall be considered
complete when the dryer indicates to the user that the cycle has
finished (by means of a display, indicator light, audible signal, or
other signal) and the heater and drum/fan motor shuts off for the
final time. If the clothes dryer is equipped with a wrinkle
prevention mode (i.e., that continuously or intermittently tumbles
the clothes dryer drum after the clothes dryer indicates to the user
that the cycle has finished) that is activated by default in the as-
shipped position or if manufacturers' instructions specify that the
feature is recommended to be activated for normal use, the cycle
shall be considered complete after the end of the wrinkle prevention
mode. After the completion of the test cycle, remove and weigh the
test load. Record the data specified in section 3.4 of this
appendix. If the final moisture content is greater than 2 percent,
the results from the test are invalid and a second run must be
conducted. Conduct the second run of the test on the unit using the
highest dryness level setting. If, on this second run, the dryer
does not achieve a final moisture content of 2 percent or lower, the
dryer has not sufficiently dried the clothes and the test results
may not be used for certification of compliance with energy
conservation standards. If the dryer automatically stops during a
cycle because the condensation box is full of water, the test is
stopped, and the test run is invalid, in which case the condensation
box shall be emptied and the test re-run from the beginning. For
ventless clothes dryers, during the time between two cycles, the
door of the dryer shall be closed except for loading and unloading.
* * * * *
3.4.1 Bone-dry weight of the test load, Wbonedry, as
described in section 2.7.1 of this appendix.
3.4.2 Moisture content of the wet test load before the test,
MCw, as described in section 2.7.2 of this appendix.
3.4.3 Moisture content of the dry test load obtained after the
test, MCd, as described in section 3.3 of this appendix.
* * * * *
3.5 Standby mode and off mode power. Connect the clothes dryer
to a watt meter as specified in section 2.4.7 of this appendix.
Establish the testing conditions set forth in section 2 of this
appendix.
3.5.1 Perform standby mode and off mode testing after completion
of an active mode drying cycle included as part of the test cycle;
after removing the test load; without changing the control panel
settings used for the active mode drying cycle; with the door
closed; and without disconnecting the electrical energy supply to
the clothes dryer between completion of the active mode drying cycle
and the start of standby mode and off mode testing.
3.5.2 For clothes dryers that take some time to automatically
enter a stable inactive mode or off mode state from a higher power
state as discussed in Section 5, Paragraph 5.1, Note 1 of IEC 62301
(Second Edition) (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3), allow
sufficient time for the clothes dryer to automatically reach the
default inactive/off mode state before proceeding with the test
measurement.
3.5.3 Once the stable inactive/off mode state has been reached,
measure and record the default inactive/off mode power,
Pdefault, in watts, following the test procedure for the
sampling method specified in Section 5, Paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301
(Second Edition) (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 430.3).
3.5.4 For a clothes dryer with a switch (or other means) that
can be optionally selected by the end user to achieve a lower-power
inactive/off mode state than the default inactive/off mode state
measured in section 3.5.3 of this appendix, after performing the
measurement in section 3.5.3 of this appendix, activate the switch
(or other means) to the position resulting in the lowest power
consumption and repeat the measurement procedure described in
section 3.5.3 of this appendix. Measure and record the lowest
inactive/off mode power, Plowest, in watts.
* * * * *
4.1 Total per-cycle electric dryer energy consumption. Calculate
the total per-cycle electric dryer energy consumption required to
achieve a final moisture content of 2 percent or less,
Ece, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined
as:
Ece = Et,
for automatic termination control dryers, and,
Ece = [55.5/(MCw - MCd)] x
Et x field use,
for timer dryers
Where:
55.5 = an experimentally established value for the percent reduction
in the moisture content of the test load during a laboratory test
cycle expressed as a percent.
Et = the energy recorded in section 3.4.5 of this
appendix.
field use = 1.18, the field use factor for clothes dryers with time
termination control systems only without any automatic termination
control functions.
MCw = the moisture content of the wet test load as
recorded in section 3.4.2 of this appendix.
MCd = the moisture content of the dry test load as
recorded in section 3.4.3 of this appendix.
4.2 Per-cycle gas dryer electrical energy consumption. Calculate
the per-cycle gas dryer electrical energy consumption required to
achieve a final moisture content of 2 percent or less,
Ege, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined
as:
Ege = Ete,
for automatic termination control dryers, and,
Ege = [55.5/(MCw - MCd)] x
Ete x field use,
for timer dryers
Where:
Ete = the energy recorded in section 3.4.6.1 of this
appendix.
field use, 55.5, MCw, and MCd as defined in
section 4.1 of this appendix.
4.3 Per-cycle gas dryer gas energy consumption. Calculate the
per-cycle gas dryer gas energy consumption required to achieve a
final moisture content of 2 percent or less, Egg,
expressed in Btus per cycle and defined as:
Egg = Etg x GEF
for automatic termination control dryers, and,
Egg = [55.5/(MCw - MCd)] x
Etg x field use x GEF
for timer dryers
Where:
Etg = the energy recorded in section 3.4.6.2 of this
appendix.
GEF = corrected gas heat value (Btu per cubic foot) as defined in
section 3.4.6.3 of this appendix,
field use, 55.5, MCw, and MCd as defined in
section 4.1 of this appendix.
4.4 Total per-cycle gas dryer energy consumption expressed in
kilowatt-hours. Calculate the total per-cycle gas dryer energy
consumption required to achieve a final moisture content of 2
percent or less, Ecg, expressed in kilowatt-hours per
cycle and defined as:
Ecg = Ege + (Egg/3412 Btu/kWh)
Where:
Ege = the energy calculated in section 4.2 of this
appendix
Egg = the energy calculated in section 4.3 of this
appendix
4.5 Per-cycle standby mode and off mode energy consumption.
Calculate the clothes dryer per-cycle standby mode and off mode
energy consumption, ETSO, expressed in kilowatt-hours per
cycle and defined as:
ETSO = [(Pdefault x Sdefault) +
(Plowest x Slowest)] x K/283
Where:
Pdefault = Default inactive/off mode power, in watts, as
measured in section 3.5.3 of this appendix.
Plowest = Lowest inactive/off mode power, in watts, as
measured in section 3.5.4 of this appendix for clothes dryer with a
switch (or other means) that can be optionally selected by the end
user to achieve a lower-power inactive/off mode than the default
inactive/off mode; otherwise, Plowest=0.
Sdefault= Annual hours in default inactive/off mode,
defined as 8,620 if no optional lowest-power inactive/off mode is
available; otherwise 4,310.
Slowest= Annual hours in lowest-power inactive/off mode,
defined as 0 if no optional lowest-power inactive/off mode is
available; otherwise 4,310.
K = Conversion factor of watt-hours to kilowatt-hours = 0.001.
283 = Representative average number of clothes dryer cycles in a
year.
8,620 = Combined annual hours for inactive and off mode.
4,310 = One-half of the combined annual hours for inactive and off
mode.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-15208 Filed 7-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P