[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 111 (Friday, June 11, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31182-31194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12160]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 111 / Friday, June 11, 2021 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 31182]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE-2017-BT-TP-0008]
RIN 1904-AD83
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Commercial
Equipment; Early Assessment Review: Commercial Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is undertaking an
early assessment review to determine whether amendments are warranted
for the test procedure for commercial refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, and freezers (``CRE''). DOE has identified certain issues
associated with the currently applicable test procedure on which DOE is
interested in receiving comment. The issues identified in this document
concern scope and definitions, industry test standards, test conditions
for specific CRE categories, test procedure clarifications and
modifications, alternative refrigerants, certification of volumes, and
test procedure waivers. DOE welcomes written comments from the public
on any subject within the scope of this document, including topics not
raised in this request for information (``RFI'').
DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be
accepted on or before July 26, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2017-BT-
TP-0008 and/or RIN 1904-AD83, by any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: httsp://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: To [email protected]. Include docket number EERE-
2017-BT-TP-0008 and/or RIN 1904-AD83 in the subject line of the
message.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this
process, see section III of this document (Submission of Comments).
Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions
through a variety of mechanism, including the Federal eRulemaking
Portal, email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier, the Department
has found it necessary to make temporary modifications to the comment
submission process in light of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. DOE is
currently suspending receipt of public comments via postal mail and
hand delivery/courier. If a commenter finds that this change poses an
undue hardship, please contact Appliance Standards Program staff at
(202) 586-1445 to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once
the Covid-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates
resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission,
including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.
Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials,
is available for review at https://www.regulations.gov. All documents
in the docket are listed in the https://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/EERE-2017-BT-TP-0008. The docket web page contains instructions
on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the
docket. See section III of this document for information on how to
submit comments through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Stephanie Johnson, 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) 287-1943. Email:
[email protected].
Peter Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-9496. Email: [email protected].
For further information on how to submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority
B. Rulemaking History
II. Request for Information
A. Scope and Definitions
B. Updates to Industry Test Standards
C. Test Conditions for Specific CRE Categories
D. Harmonization of Efficiency Standards and Testing With NSF 7-
2019 Food Safety Provisions
E. Dedicated Remote Condensing Units
F. Test Procedure Clarifications and Modifications
G. Alternative Refrigerants
H. Certification of Compartment Volume
I. Test Procedure Waivers
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
DOE established an early assessment review process to conduct a
more focused analysis that would allow DOE to determine, based on
statutory criteria, whether an amended test procedure is warranted. 10
CFR part 430 subpart C appendix A section 8(a). This RFI requests
information and data regarding whether an amended test would more
accurately and fully comply with the requirement that the test
procedure produce results that measure energy use during a
representative average use cycle for the equipment, and not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. To inform interested parties and to facilitate
this process, DOE has identified several issues associated with the
currently applicable test procedures on which DOE is interested in
receiving comment. Based on the information
[[Page 31183]]
received in response to the RFI and DOE's own analysis, DOE will
determine whether to proceed with a rulemaking for an amended test
procedure.
If DOE makes an initial determination that an amended test
procedure would more accurately or fully comply with statutory
requirements, or DOE's analysis is inconclusive, DOE would undertake a
rulemaking to issue an amended test procedure. If DOE makes an initial
determination based upon available evidence that an amended test
procedure would not meet the applicable statutory criteria, DOE would
engage in notice and comment rulemaking before issuing a final
determination that an amended test procedure is not warranted.
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 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 C \2\ of EPCA, added by Public Law
95-619, Title IV, section 441(a) (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317 as codified),
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial
Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve
energy efficiency. This equipment includes CRE, the subject of this
document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(E))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 include definitions (42 U.S.C.
6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C.
6315), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the
authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42
U.S.C. 6316).
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. 6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however,
grant waivers of Federal preemption in limited instances for particular
State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other
provisions set forth under 42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and (e) (applying the
preemption waiver provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6297)).
EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered product, including CRE, 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. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(1)) DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information
to inform its decision to satisfy the 7-year-lookback review
requirement.
B. Rulemaking History
The current DOE test procedure for CRE is codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations (``CFR'') at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B
(``Appendix B''). DOE last updated the test procedure in a final rule
published on April 24, 2014 (``April 2014 Final Rule''). 79 FR 22277.
Specifically, DOE clarified certain terms, procedures, and compliance
dates to improve repeatability and provide additional detail compared
to the prior version of the test procedure. DOE noted that the
amendments in the April 2014 Final Rule would not affect the measured
energy use of CRE as measured under the prior version of the test
procedure. 79 FR 22277, 22280-22281. DOE's current test procedure
incorporates by reference the following industry standards: (1) Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (``AHRI'') Standard
1200 (I-P)-2010 (``AHRI 1200-2010''), ``Performance Rating of
Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets'';
(2) the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (``ASHRAE'') Standard 72-2005 (``ASHRAE 72-
2005''), ``Method of Testing Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,''
which was approved by the American National Standards Institute
(``ANSI'') on July 29, 2005; and (3) ANSI/Association of Home
Appliances (``AHAM'') Standard HRF-1-2008 (``AHAM HRF-1-2008''),
``Energy, Performance, and Capacity of Household Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers,'' for determining refrigerated
volumes for CRE.
II. Request for Information
DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information during
the early assessment review to inform its decision, consistent with its
obligations under EPCA, as to whether the Department should proceed
with an amended test procedure rulemaking, and if so, to assist in the
development of proposed amendments. Accordingly, in the following
sections, DOE has identified specific issues on which it seeks input to
aid in its analysis of whether an amended test procedure for CRE would
more accurately or fully comply with the requirement that the test
procedure produces results that measure energy use during a
representative average use cycle for the product, and not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. DOE also welcomes comments on other issues
relevant to its early assessment that may not specifically be
identified in this document.
A. Scope and Definitions
CRE means refrigeration equipment that is not a consumer product
(as defined in 10 CFR 430.2); is not designed and marketed exclusively
for medical, scientific, or research purposes; operates at a chilled,
frozen, combination chilled and frozen, or variable temperature;
displays or stores merchandise and other perishable materials
horizontally, semi-vertically, or vertically; has transparent or solid
doors, sliding or hinged doors, a combination of hinged, sliding,
transparent, or solid doors, or no doors; is designed for pull-down
temperature applications or holding temperature applications; and is
connected to a self-contained condensing unit or to a remote condensing
unit. 10 CFR 431.62.
1. Ice-Cream Freezers
DOE further defines categories of CRE, including ``ice-cream
freezer.'' DOE defines an ice-cream freezer as a commercial freezer
that is designed to operate at or below -5 [deg]F (2
[deg]F) (-21 [deg]C 1.1 [deg]C) and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends for the storing, displaying, or dispensing
of ice cream. 10 CFR 431.62. As such, under this definition, equipment
not designed, marketed, or intended specifically for the storage,
display, or dispensing of ice cream, would not be considered an ``ice-
cream freezer,'' regardless of operating temperature.
A manufacturer's design intent may not always be explicit for all
CRE. For example, a manufacturer may design a model capable of storing,
displaying, or dispensing of ice cream, and intend for that operation
when in use, but only specify technical operating parameters in the
manufacturer literature for that model with no explicit reference to
ice cream. In such a case, the
[[Page 31184]]
manufacturer's design intent would be unknown to a third party.
DOE is considering amendments to the definition of ice-cream
freezer that would incorporate technical features and characteristics
to better delineate this equipment from other commercial freezers.
Issue 1: DOE requests comment on the technical features that
characterize ice cream freezers and distinguish them from commercial
freezers capable of operating at or below -5 [deg]F (2
[deg]F).
Additionally, the ice-cream freezer definition references ``ice
cream'', but the term is not specifically defined. Gelato, frozen
yogurt, and other ice-cream-like products are typically displayed,
stored, or dispensed in the same manner as ice-cream. The CRE used for
these food products is likely similar, if not identical, to equipment
used to store, display, or dispense ice cream.
Issue 2: DOE requests comment on if further specificity is needed
for the term ``ice-cream''. DOE is also interested in whether
manufacturers are certifying equipment intended to store gelato or
other ice-cream like products as ice-cream freezers or freezers.
Appendix B requires testing all ice-cream freezers to an integrated
average temperature (``IAT'') \3\ of -15 [deg]F. However, the term
``ice-cream freezer'' includes a variety of equipment with a range of
typical operating temperatures during normal use. For example, certain
ice-cream freezers are designed to operate considerably below -5 [deg]F
(sometimes referred to as ``hardening'' cabinets and specifically
designed for ice cream storage), while other ice-cream freezers are
designed to operate closer to 0 [deg]F during typical use (e.g.,
``dipping cabinets'' and other equipment used to hold ice cream
intended for immediate consumption). Ice-cream freezers intended for
higher-temperature operation are often not capable of achieving an IAT
of -15 [deg]F. In such an instance, Appendix B requires testing the
units to the lowest application product temperature (``LAPT'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Integrated average temperature means the average temperature
of all test package measurements taken during the test. 10 CFR
431.62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of the 445 ice-cream freezer models certified to DOE,\4\ 55 are
rated based on LAPTs warmer than -15 [deg]F, including 29 models with a
rating temperature of -5 [deg]F. Many of these models are horizontal or
service over counter and intended to hold ice cream for immediate
consumption. Accordingly, testing at an IAT of 0 [deg]F may be more
representative of typical operation than testing to the LAPT for these
models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Based on review of DOE's Compliance Certification Database,
available at https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data
(accessed February 5, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If certain ice-cream freezers not capable of reaching an IAT of -15
[deg]F should instead be tested at an IAT of 0 [deg]F, there may be an
opportunity to better distinguish between ice-cream freezers and other
freezers, as discussed earlier in this section. For example, the ice-
cream freezer definition could be revised to refer to any freezer
capable of operating at an IAT of -15 [deg]F, regardless of the product
stored in the equipment. Any other equipment currently meeting the ice-
cream freezer definition but not capable of reaching an IAT of -15
[deg]F would instead be classified and tested as freezers, not ice-
cream freezers. Such an approach would use the measured IAT of the
equipment as the foundation for this equipment definition, thus
eliminating the reliance on manufacturer intent or the end use of the
equipment.
Issue 3: DOE seeks feedback on whether equipment that meets the
current ice-cream freezer definition but cannot operate at an IAT of -
15 [deg]F 2 [deg]F should be tested at an IAT of 0 [deg]F
2[deg]F instead of the LAPT.
Issue 4: DOE additionally requests comment on whether the ice-cream
freezer definition should only refer to equipment that is capable of
achieving an IAT of -15 [deg]F 2 [deg]F without any
reference to the manufacturer's designed, marketed, or intended use.
2. High-Temperature CRE
Section 2.1 of Appendix B requires testing commercial refrigerators
to an IAT of 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. DOE is aware of equipment
that meets the definition of a commercial refrigerator but is capable
of operating only at temperatures above the 38 [deg]F 2
[deg]F IAT required for testing. Consistent with the current test
procedure, manufacturers certify such equipment using the LAPT setting.
Examples of these types of equipment include CRE designed for storing
or displaying chocolate and/or wine, with typical recommended storage
temperatures around 55 [deg]F.
DOE is considering adding a definition for ``high-temperature
refrigerator'' to better delineate commercial refrigerators not capable
of operating at the IAT required for testing a commercial refrigerator.
DOE is also considering establishing separate test requirements for
high-temperature refrigerators, including the IAT required for testing.
For consumer refrigeration products, DOE established the miscellaneous
refrigeration product category to capture such products, with
``coolers'' tested at a standardized cabinet temperature of 55
[deg]F.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A, section 3.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 5: DOE requests comment on whether an IAT of 55 [deg]F 2 [deg]F is an appropriate test condition for commercial high-
temperature refrigerators. DOE also requests data on the typical
operating temperatures of CRE that operate above an IAT of 38 [deg]F
2 [deg]F.
Issue 6: DOE requests comment on whether any additional changes or
clarifications are needed to the test procedure to better account for
the energy consumption of commercial high-temperature refrigerators.
For example, DOE requests information on whether the current loading
and door-opening requirements are appropriate for high-temperature CRE.
B. Updates to Industry Test Standards
As discussed previously, DOE's test procedure for CRE currently
incorporates by reference AHRI 1200-2010, ASHRAE 72-2005, and AHAM HRF-
1-2008. 10 CFR 431.63. AHRI 1200-2010 also references ASHRAE 72-2005
and AHAM HRF-1-2008.
Since establishing the DOE test procedure in Appendix B, AHRI,
ASHRAE, and AHAM have published updated versions of the referenced test
standards. On October 1, 2013, ANSI approved an updated version of AHRI
1200, ANSI/AHRI Standard 1200 (I-P), ``2013 Standard for Performance
Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandizers and Storage
Cabinets,'' (``AHRI 1200-2013''). On August 1, 2018, ANSI approved an
updated version of ASHRAE 72, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2018, ``Method of
Testing Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,''
(``ASHRAE 72-2018''). AHAM more recently approved and published an
updated version of its industry test standard, AHAM HRF-1-2019,
``Energy and Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances,'' (``AHAM
HRF-1-2019''). The changes within these updated industry test standards
are either editorial, to improve clarity, to better harmonize with the
DOE test procedure, or relevant to other product types (e.g., consumer
refrigerators). Based on DOE's initial assessment, the changes in the
updated versions of the industry test standards would not impact the
measured energy consumption, volume, or Total Display Area (``TDA'') of
CRE, as applicable.
DOE is considering whether to update the current CRE test procedure
and incorporate by reference the updated
[[Page 31185]]
industry test standards: AHRI 1200-2013, ASHRAE 72-2018, and AHAM HRF-
1-2016. These references would replace previous references to the
superseded AHRI 1200-2010, ASHRAE 72-2005, and AHAM HRF-1-2008
standards referenced in the current CRE test procedure.
DOE is also aware of updates being considered for AHRI 1200-2013
and ASHRAE 72-2018. DOE has participated in the industry committee
meetings in which updates to these industry standards are being
developed. Based on these meetings, the changes being considered by the
industry committee appear intended largely to improve the clarity,
consistency, and representativeness of the industry test methods. For
these and the other referenced industry standards, were DOE to
determine to propose an amended CRE test procedure, DOE would consider
adopting the most updated industry test procedures available during the
course of such a rulemaking.
Issue 7: DOE requests comment on whether it should reference the
most recent versions of AHRI 1200 or ASHRAE 72 and whether any of the
updates to these standards would have an impact on the measured energy
consumption of CRE, and if so, how. DOE additionally requests comment
on whether the CRE test procedure should reference the most current
version of AHAM HRF-1 and whether any of the updates to that standard
would have an impact on measured volume, and if so, how.
AHRI has another rating standard applicable to CRE that use a
secondary coolant or refrigerant, AHRI Standard 1320 (I-P), ``2011
Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets for Use With Secondary
Refrigerants,'' (``AHRI 1320-2011''), approved by ANSI on April 17,
2012. AHRI 1320-2011 is applicable to cases that are equipped and
designed to work with electrically driven, medium-temperature, single-
phase secondary coolant systems, but excludes equipment used for low-
temperature applications, secondary coolants involving a phase change
(e.g., ice slurries or carbon dioxide), and self-contained CRE. AHRI
1320-2011 includes similar rating temperature conditions as those in
AHRI 1200-2013 and references ASHRAE 72-2005 and AHAM HRF-1-2008 for
the measurement of energy consumption and calculation of refrigerated
volume, respectively. The only substantive differences between AHRI
1200-2013 and AHRI 1320-2011 are the inclusion of secondary refrigerant
circulation pump energy consumption in the calculation of total daily
energy consumption and revised coefficients of performance to determine
compressor energy consumption. DOE is evaluating AHRI 1320-2011 as a
potential test method to rate CRE that use secondary refrigerants.
Issue 8: DOE requests comment on whether AHRI 1320-2011 would be an
appropriate test method to measure the total daily energy consumption
of CRE that use a secondary refrigerant circuit, and whether it would
provide representative measurements of energy use. DOE also seeks
information and data on CRE designed to work with electrically driven,
medium-temperature, single-phase secondary coolant systems, including
the typical field installations and operating conditions.
Issue 9: DOE also requests comment on whether manufacturers sell or
plan to sell CRE with secondary coolant that would be outside the
stated applicability of AHRI 1320-2011, including low-temperature
equipment or CRE using secondary coolants with a phase change (e.g.,
ice slurries or carbon dioxide), and on whether any other existing test
standards are appropriate for rating such equipment.
C. Test Conditions for Specific CRE Categories
DOE has identified specific categories of CRE that are not
currently subject to the DOE test procedure. These certain categories
of CRE either cannot be tested using DOE's current test procedure or
the current test procedure may not be representative of their use.
These categories are discussed in the following paragraphs. In this
RFI, DOE is considering whether amendments are warranted to DOE's
current test procedures to provide for the appropriate testing of such
categories of CRE. This section discusses potential definitions and
test procedures for each category of CRE identified. Additionally, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') ENERGY STAR program
recently announced that it is considering three of these equipment
categories for scope expansion and test method development:
Refrigerated preparation and buffet tables; chef bases or griddle
stands; and blast chillers and freezers.\6\ DOE will consider
information gathered through that process when determining whether
these equipment categories should be defined and included within the
scope of DOE's CRE test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Information and materials for ENERGY STAR's Specification
Version 5.0 process are available at https://www.energystar.gov/products/spec/commercial_refrigerators_and_freezers_specification_version_5_0_pd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Salad Bars, Buffet Tables and Refrigerated Preparation Tables
Salad bars, buffet tables, and other refrigerated holding and
serving equipment, such as refrigerated preparation tables, are CRE
that store and display perishable items temporarily during food
preparation or service. These units typically have easily accessible or
open bins that allow convenient and unimpeded access to the
refrigerated products. In the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE did not
include test procedures for this equipment, but maintained that this
equipment meets the definition of CRE and could therefore be subject to
future test procedures and energy conservation standards. 77 FR 22278,
22281. In this RFI, DOE is considering definitions and test procedures
applicable to salad bars, buffet tables, and refrigerated preparation
tables.\7\ As discussed in sections II.C.4 and II.C.5 of this RFI, DOE
is also requesting information on other refrigerated holding and
serving equipment, including definitions and appropriate test
procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ While the April 2014 Final Rule did not specifically refer
to refrigerated preparation tables, DOE is considering them in this
RFI because they have similar features to salad bars and buffet
tables (e.g., an open top holding refrigerated pans) and are used
during food preparation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASTM International F2143-16 ``Standard Test Method for Performance
of Refrigerated Buffet and Preparation Tables'' (``ASTM F2143-16'')
provides the following definitions for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables:
Refrigerated buffet and preparation table--equipment
designed with a refrigerated open top or open condiment rail.
Refrigerated buffet table or unit--equipment designed with
mechanical refrigeration that is intended to receive refrigerated food
and maintain food product temperatures and is intended for customer
service such as a salad bar. A unit may or may not be equipped with a
lower refrigerated compartment.
Refrigerated food preparation unit--equipment designed
with a refrigerated open top or open condiment rail such as
refrigerated sandwich units, pizza preparation tables, and similar
equipment. The unit may or may not be equipped with a lower
refrigerated compartment.
DOE will consider these definitions if it determines that
definitions for these equipment categories are appropriate. DOE notes
that certain terms used within these definitions are undefined
[[Page 31186]]
(e.g., condiment rails, food product temperatures). Additionally, DOE
is not aware of any other industry standard definitions for these
equipment types (nor for salad bars). DOE is requesting feedback to
better understand the appropriate terms, definitions, and operating
characteristics of salad bars, buffet tables, and refrigerated
preparation. This information would inform DOE's decision to group or
differentiate different types of equipment within this category in any
eventual definitions or test procedures.
Issue 10: DOE requests comment on the suitability of the ASTM
F2143-16 definitions for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables
(and also their applicability to salad bars) as potential regulatory
definitions for this equipment. DOE requests comment on whether any
further delineation of the equipment category, salad bars, buffet
tables, and refrigerated preparation tables, is necessary to account
for the range of performance related features available in this
equipment (e.g., presence of pan covers, refrigerated storage
compartments, and any other unique configurations or features that may
require consideration for any potential test procedures).
Issue 11: DOE requests comment on the specific features and
equipment capabilities that should be included in definitions for
refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables. For
example, DOE seeks information on the factors that would differentiate
this equipment from other typical CRE. DOE also requests whether
potential definitions should specify temperature operating ranges, and
if so, what the appropriate ranges would be.
The configuration of salad bars, buffet tables, and refrigerated
preparation tables may also raise questions as to whether a unit is
commercial hybrid refrigeration equipment. Commercial hybrid
refrigeration equipment is a unit of CRE (1) that consists of two or
more thermally separated refrigerated compartments that are in two or
more different equipment families, and (2) that is sold as a single
unit. 10 CFR 431.62. Additional detail may be necessary to distinguish
between a unit that is a salad bar, buffet table, or refrigerated
preparation table and a unit that is commercial hybrid equipment that
includes a salad bar, buffet table, or refrigerated preparation table.
Refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables
typically have removable pans or bins that directly contact the chilled
air in the refrigerated compartment of the unit. With that
configuration, the entirety of the chilled compartment and surface pans
would potentially be considered a refrigerated salad bar, buffet table,
or preparation table. In contrast, if a unit includes solid partitions
between the chilled compartment and the pans or bins on top of the
unit, such a configuration would potentially be considered thermal
separation and the unit would be considered a commercial hybrid
consisting of a refrigerated salad bar, buffet table, or preparation
table with a refrigerator and/or freezer.
Issue 12: DOE requests comment on whether the presence of thermally
separating partitions should be considered as a factor to differentiate
between refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables
on the one hand, and commercial hybrid units consisting of a
refrigerated salad bar, buffet table, or preparation table with a
refrigerator and/or freezer on the other hand.
In conjunction with considering definitions for this equipment, DOE
is also considering whether to adopt a test procedure to evaluate their
energy consumption. DOE reviewed ASTM F2143-16 and noted several
differences between this test method and DOE's current test procedure
for CRE.
Specifically, ASTM F2143-16 specifies different rating conditions
for test room dry-bulb temperature and moisture content than the
current DOE test procedure. Table II-1 summarizes these differences.
Table II-1--Test Room Dry-Bulb Temperature & Moisture Content Standards Comparison
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet bulb
Test room dry bulb temperature Moisture content
Equipment type Test standard temperature (relative (lb/lb dry air)
humidity)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently Covered CRE........... ASHRAE 72-2005 75.2 [deg]F 1.8 [deg]F minus> 1.8 [deg]F
reference). (49-62 percent *).
Buffet and Preparation Tables... ASTM F2143-16..... 86 [deg]F 2 [deg]F minus> 1.8 [deg]F
* (30-40 percent).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Equivalent value from psychrometric conversion. ASHRAE 72-2005 specifies web bulb temperature, while ASTM
F2143-16 specifies relative humidity.
Issue 13: DOE requests comment and supporting data on test room
dry-bulb temperature and moisture content typically experienced by
refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables
operating in the field. DOE requests comment on whether these
conditions are significantly different from those encountered by
conventional CRE and would justify adopting separate rating conditions
for refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables.
For measuring these ambient conditions, ASHRAE 72-2018 and ASTM
F2143-16 specify the same measurement locations; however, the locations
may require further specificity depending on the configuration of the
refrigerated salad bar, buffet table, or preparation table under test.
For example, is the measurement location based on the highest point of
the unit under test could be based on the height of the refrigerated
table surface and pan openings or on the height of any lid or cover
over the pans, if included. Additionally, the measurement location at
the center of the unit could be based on the geometric center of the
unit determined from the height of the open pan surfaces or on the
geometric center of any door openings (for those units with
refrigerated compartments below the pan area).
Issue 14: DOE requests comment on the appropriate locations for
recording ambient conditions when testing refrigerated salad bars,
buffet tables, and preparation tables to ensure repeatable and
reproducible testing for a range of equipment configurations.
DOE notes that ASTM F2143-16 specifies temperature measurements for
refrigerated preparation or buffet tables be taken from standardized
pans filled with distilled water. ASTM F2143-16 also specifies
measuring the temperature in any chilled compartments for refrigerated
buffet and preparation tables using three thermocouples in an empty,
unloaded compartment. DOE's current test procedure, which incorporates
by reference ASHRAE 72-2005 and AHRI 1200-2010, requires that
integrated average temperature measurements be taken from test
simulators consisting of a plastic container filled with a sponge
saturated with a 2-percent mixture of propylene glycol and distilled
water. See ASHRAE 72-2005, section 6.2.1. Additionally, the DOE test
procedure
[[Page 31187]]
requires 70 to 90 percent of the compartment net usable volume to be
loaded with filler material and test simulators for testing. See ASHRAE
72-2005, section 6.2.5. Refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and
preparation tables may not typically be loaded to 70 percent of their
net usable volume due to their use for service rather than long-term
storage but testing with the refrigerated compartment entirely empty
also may not be representative of average use.
Issue 15: DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of using only
distilled water as the test medium to represent thermo-physical
properties of foods that are typically stored in the surface pans of
refrigerated salad bars, preparation tables, or buffet tables. DOE
requests comment on whether adopting test packages and filler materials
similar to DOE's current test procedure (as specified in ASHRAE 72-
2005) may better represent the properties of these foods, instead of
distilled water.
Issue 16: DOE requests comment on the feasibility of requiring
temperature measurements in closed refrigerated compartments of
refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables using
test packages as specified in ASHRAE 72, and whether the compartments
should be loaded with any filler packages (and to what percent of the
net usable volume) for testing. If the test packages are not
appropriate for measuring compartment temperatures, DOE requests
comment on alternatives that should be used instead (e.g.,
thermocouples located in pans filled with distilled water,
thermocouples as specified in ASTM F2143-16, or weighted
thermocouples).
Additionally, ASTM F2143-16 specifies the pans for holding water to
be standard 4-inch deep \1/6\-size metal steam table pans with a weight
of 0.70 0.07 lb. ASTM F2143-16 allows for manufacturer
specified pans if the unit is designed specifically for such pans. DOE
notes that manufacturers typically specify pan dimensions or provide
pans for their units, but some manufacturers do not provide a pan depth
or may specify a range of possible pan depths. DOE also notes that pan
materials can vary and are not always specified by the manufacturer.
Issue 17: DOE requests comment on whether pan dimensions should be
standardized if testing refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and
preparation tables is required, or whether these units should be tested
with pans meeting manufacturer-recommended pan dimensions. If pans were
standardized, DOE requests comment on whether the dimensions described
in ASTM F2143-16 are appropriately representative of what is used, or
whether another set of dimensions or materials would be more
appropriate. DOE also requests information on whether the pan material
should be defined in greater detail, recognizing that ASTM F2143-16
specifies only that the pans be ``metal.''
Section 10.5.6 of ASTM F2143-16 specifies that if it is possible to
control cooling to the display area independently of the refrigerated
cabinet, the cooling to the display area is turned off and all pans are
to be moved from the display area to the refrigerated cabinet
underneath after the active period. The ability to control cooling in
both the display area and the refrigerated cabinet independently of
each other suggests that this language applies to units with thermally-
separated compartments and pan areas, which may be considered
commercial hybrid refrigeration equipment.
Issue 18: DOE requests comment on whether moving pans from the
display area to the refrigerated compartment as specified in section
10.5.6 of ASTM F2143-16 is appropriate for testing refrigerated salad
bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables. DOE further requests
feedback on whether storing pans in a refrigerated compartment is
typical only for those units with certain configurations--e.g., thermal
separation between the compartment and refrigerated pan area or
closable covers for the pan area.
As described, refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and
preparation tables store and display perishable items temporarily
during food preparation or service. Due to the short duration of use of
salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables, these equipment
types may not be used for the same 24-hour duration used to
characterize performance for other categories of CRE. However, ASTM
F2143-16 specifies a 24-hour test, with an active period of 8 hours and
a standby period of 16 hours. The active period provisions contain
instructions for a cover, if equipped: Open for 2 hours, closed for 4
hours, open for 2 hours. These provisions also contain instructions for
a door opening sequence: Every 30 minutes, each cabinet door or drawer,
or both, shall be fully opened sequentially, one at a time, for 6
consecutive seconds. For units with pass-thru doors, only the doors on
one side of the unit are opened.
Issue 19: DOE requests comment on the typical daily usage of
refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables.
Additionally, DOE requests feedback on whether these CRE are used for
long-term storage of food or only short-term storage during food
preparation or service periods. DOE also requests comment on whether
the daily use of this equipment varies depending on configuration or
other technical characteristics.
Issue 20: DOE requests comment on the applicability of the ASTM
F2143-16 door and cover opening specifications. If the ASTM door and
cover opening requirements are not representative of typical use, DOE
requests comment on an appropriate door and cover opening sequence. For
example, DOE requests comment on whether the door-opening requirements
specified in ASHRAE 72-2018 are appropriate for refrigerated salad
bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables.
ASHRAE 72-2018 and ASTM F2143-16 have different loading
requirements for stabilization. ASTM F2143-16 specifies that the unit
operates with empty pans for at least 2 hours, water be pre-cooled
before being loaded into the pans, and, once the water has been loaded
into the pans, that the thermostat be calibrated until the pan
temperatures are never outside of 33 [deg]F to 41 [deg]F for any 15-
minute period over a 4-hour measurement period. Although ASHRAE 72-2018
does not specify how to test units with display pans, it generally
provides that the unit be loaded with test simulators and filler
packages and then operated to establish steady-state conditions over
consecutive 24-hour periods or refrigeration cycles.
Issue 21: DOE requests comment on the appropriate stabilization
method to use when testing refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables, and
preparation tables.
ASTM F2143-16 instructs that if a buffet or preparation table is
equipped with a refrigerated compartment, the compartment air
temperature is to be between 33 [deg]F and 41 [deg]F. Likewise, the
water temperature of the pans placed in the display area also are to be
between 33 [deg]F and 41 [deg]F. Alternatively, the DOE test procedure
for other CRE requires IATs of 38 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for
medium temperature applications. Through preliminary research, DOE has
found that buffet and preparation tables use a variety of refrigeration
methods for cooling the pans in the display area and the refrigerated
compartment. In some configurations, units might not be able to
maintain all pans and the refrigerated compartment within the specified
temperature range. For example, units with a single refrigeration
system and thermostat control for temperatures in either the
refrigerated compartment or in the pans. As a result, it may be
possible for only the refrigerated compartment or the pans, but not
both,
[[Page 31188]]
to be kept within a specified temperature range during operation.
Issue 22: DOE requests comment on appropriate temperature ranges
for all pans and compartments during testing, and whether the test
temperature should be specified as an allowable range or as a target
IAT with a specified tolerance. Additionally, if a target IAT is
appropriate, the pans and any refrigerated compartment IAT could be
measured separately from each other, or all temperature measurement
locations within the refrigerated compartment and pans could be
averaged together to determine a single IAT. If separate IATs of the
pans and the compartment should be used, DOE requests comment on which
IAT should be used to determine the appropriate thermostat control (if
the unit only has one overall temperature control).
ASTM F2143-16 specifies the reporting of ``production capacity,''
which is defined as the total volume of the pans when each pan is
filled within one-half inch of the rim. However, energy consumption of
refrigerated buffet and preparation tables likely varies with pan
volume as well as the volume of any closed refrigerated compartments.
Therefore, both values are of interest when considering metrics that
define energy performance. Additionally, pan surface area could be
another possible metric that defines energy performance, similar to TDA
for horizontal open equipment classes. This method may eliminate the
variability with different test pan dimensions. However, using either
pan surface area or TDA as the relevant performance metric may lead to
difficulty when also accounting for the storage volume of any
refrigerated compartments in the equipment.
Issue 23: DOE requests comment on the potential methodologies for
determining pan volume, pan surface area, and pan TDA, as well as
refrigerated compartment volume for refrigerated salad bars, buffet
tables, and preparation tables in a potential test procedure for this
equipment. DOE additionally requests comment on which parameter(s)
(e.g., total pan volume, pan surface area, TDA, or a combined metric),
may best represent the useful ``capacity'' of this equipment.
ASTM F2143-16 does not account for defrost cycles when testing this
equipment, other than indicating in the test report whether a defrost
cycle occurred. ASHRAE 72-2018 directs that the test period begins with
a defrost cycle. Defrost cycles increase the energy consumption of
refrigeration equipment; however, through preliminary research, DOE has
found that most refrigerated salad bars, buffet tables and preparation
tables use off-cycle defrosts, which melt any frost accumulation
through the evaporator fan running during a compressor off-cycle. This
method of defrost does not actively introduce heat to melt the
accumulated frost and may occur during the compressor's normal cycling
operation (i.e., there may not be an identifiable defrost occurrence in
the measured test data).
Issue 24: DOE requests comment on whether a possible test procedure
should consider defrost cycles for refrigerated salad bars, buffet
tables, and preparation tables, and if so, how.
2. Pull-Down Temperature Applications
As defined, a CRE must be designed for holding temperature
applications \8\ or pull-down temperature applications. 10 CFR 431.62
(42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(A)(vi)) ``Pull-down temperature application'' is a
commercial refrigerator with doors that, when fully loaded with 12-
ounce beverage cans at 90 [deg]F, can cool those beverages to an
average stable temperature of 38 [deg]F in 12 hours or less. 10 CFR
431.62 (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(D)). CRE within this definition are typically
known as beverage merchandisers or beverage coolers because of their
use in displaying individually packaged beverages for sale, and their
ability to rapidly cool such beverages. Such equipment with transparent
doors is currently subject to DOE's test procedures set forth at 10 CFR
431.64 and required to comply with the energy conservation standards
specified at 10 CFR 431.66(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Holding temperature application'' means a use of
commercial refrigeration equipment other than a pull-down
temperature application, except a blast chiller or freezer. 10 CFR
431.62 (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(B)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's current CRE test procedure does not include any procedure to
verify a unit's pull-down performance for CRE meeting the pull-down
temperature application definition. For example, the test procedure
does not provide instructions for the starting conditions of the
equipment (e.g., whether the equipment begins the test in a pre-cooled
state or at ambient temperature conditions), loading of the cans (e.g.,
whether the equipment must be loaded to full within a certain amount of
time), or how to measure the temperature of the cans to confirm cooling
to 38 [deg]F.
Issue 25: DOE seeks information on whether CRE that provides pull-
down temperature applications is sufficiently differentiated from other
types of CRE. If not, DOE seeks comment on how manufacturers currently
determine whether a model meets the pull-down temperature application
criteria. DOE requests comment on appropriate starting conditions,
loading methods, and other necessary specifications for a potential
test method to verify the pull-down performance of a commercial
refrigerator.
Whereas the current CRE test procedure specifies that commercial
refrigerators designed for pull-down applications be tested at steady
state (see 10 CFR 431.64(b), and Appendix B section 2.1), pull-down
periods may account for a substantial amount of the energy these models
consume in actual operation. In order to better reflect the
representative energy consumption associated with pull-down periods,
DOE is considering revising the test method for commercial
refrigerators designed for pull-down applications to also reflect
energy consumption during the pull-down period.
Issue 26: DOE requests comment and supporting data on the energy
consumption associated with pull-down operation for commercial
refrigerators designed for pull-down temperature applications,
including the amount of time these models typically spend in both pull-
down conditions and steady-state operation. DOE additionally requests
comment on whether a modified test method (i.e., one that accounts for
both pull-down and steady state performance) might be more appropriate
to represent the energy consumption of equipment in this class.
While the cooling criteria in the pull-down temperature application
definition is in terms of cooling beverage cans, the definition is not
explicitly limited to beverage merchandisers and beverage coolers.
Other equipment with solid doors intended to rapidly cool or freeze
food, commonly referred to as blast chillers and blast freezers, may
also meet the pull-down temperature application definition. DOE does
not define blast chiller and/or blast freezers. The California Code of
Regulations (``CCR'') defines a blast chiller as a refrigerator
designed to cool food products from 140 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F within four
hours. (CCR, Title 20, section 1602) DOE seeks comment on whether there
is equipment that is not a beverage merchandiser or beverage cooler,
but that would meet the pull-down temperature application definitions.
Issue 27: DOE requests comment on whether definitions are needed
for blast chillers and blast freezers to further delineate the
equipment subject to the DOE test procedures and standards. If
definitions are needed, DOE requests comment on the appropriate
definitions for blast chillers and blast freezers, including how to
differentiate such
[[Page 31189]]
equipment from CRE currently subject to testing and compliance with
DOE's energy conservation standards.
DOE is not aware of any existing test methods for assessing the
energy performance of equipment generally considered blast chillers and
blast freezers. ASHRAE has established a standard project committee
(``SPC'') to consider the development of an industry test standard for
this equipment: SPC 220P, Method of Testing for Rating Small Commercial
Blast Chillers, Chiller-Freezers, and Freezers.\9\ DOE is participating
in this process and will consider referencing publicly available
industry standards as may be appropriate in any future test procedure
rulemaking. DOE is requesting information on typical blast chiller and
blast freezer operation to evaluate any eventual test methods available
for this equipment
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See https://www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/standards-and-guidelines/project-committee-interim-meetings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 28: DOE requests comment and supporting data on the typical
ambient conditions experienced by blast chillers and blast freezers.
Issue 29: DOE requests comment and supporting data on the typical
usage settings for blast chillers and blast freezers and how different
set-point modes affect energy performance. For units with multiple
temperature settings within the refrigerator or freezer temperature
range, DOE requests comment on which setting is appropriate for
testing. Additionally, for units with settings that affect the pull-
down duration, DOE requests comment on whether the fastest or slowest
setting (or any other setting if more than two settings are provided)
should be used for testing.
3. Chef Bases and Griddle Stands
DOE defines ``chef base or griddle stand'' as CRE that is designed
and marketed for the express purpose of having a griddle or other
cooking appliance placed on top of it that is capable of reaching
temperatures hot enough to cook food. 10 CFR 431.62. In this RFI, DOE
is requesting information and feedback regarding definitions and test
procedures for chef bases and griddle stands.
As discussed in the April 2014 Final Rule, the explicit
categorization of griddle stands is meant to accommodate equipment that
experiences temperatures exceeding 200 [deg]F. 79 FR 22278, 22282.
However, DOE notes that the current definition for chef bases and
griddle stands does not specify a quantitative means for determining
the equipment that meets the definition, such as a temperature rating
for cooking appliances placed on top of chef bases and griddle stands
or specifications for the refrigeration systems to differentiate this
equipment from typical CRE. Also, the DOE test procedure does not
specify unique temperature test conditions for this equipment.
Issue 30: DOE requests comment on whether the definition for chef
bases and griddle stands should be modified to include a specific
temperature requirement for cooking appliances placed on top of chef
bases and griddle stands, or other such specification. Specifically,
DOE requests feedback on a quantifiable characteristics of chef bases
and griddle stands that differentiate this equipment from other CRE.
This includes information on appropriate temperature ranges and
refrigeration system characteristics that could be used to classify
equipment as chef bases and griddle stands.
DOE stated in the April 2014 Final Rule that chef bases and griddle
stands are able to be tested according to the DOE test procedure, but
their refrigeration systems require larger compressors to provide more
cooling capacity per storage volume than equipment with compressors
that are appropriately sized for conventional CRE and more typical room
temperature conditions. As a result, this equipment tends to consume
more energy than similarly sized, conventional CRE models. 79 FR 22278,
22281-22282. Although this equipment can be tested using DOE's current
test procedure, the test room temperature conditions specified in DOE's
test procedure may not represent the conditions experienced by chef
bases and griddle stands in the field, due to the cooking equipment
installed on top of such equipment. Specifically, the current CRE test
procedure may not appropriately specify installation and setup for chef
bases and griddle stands to reflect real-world conditions.
Issue 31: DOE requests comment on whether modifications to the
current CRE test procedure would be appropriate for testing chef bases
and griddle stands to better represent real-world use conditions. DOE
specifically requests supporting data on the time per day that top-
mounted cooking equipment is active, as well as typical temperatures of
the cooking equipment when active, to gain an understanding of the
magnitude of the resulting thermal loads. DOE also requests comment on
whether the existing DOE test procedure is appropriate for measuring
the energy use of this equipment.
4. Mobile Refrigerated Cabinets
DOE does not currently define or specify test procedures for other
types of refrigerated holding and serving equipment such as certain
mobile refrigerated cabinets. As discussed in the April 2014 Final
Rule, DOE determined that such other types of refrigerated holding and
serving equipment meet the definition of CRE and could be subject to
future test procedures and energy conservation standards. 79 FR 22278,
22281. Specifically, mobile refrigerated cabinets chill the
refrigerated compartment before being unplugged from power and taken to
a remote location to hold food products while maintaining cooling. Such
equipment meets the definition of CRE as defined at 10 CFR 431.62;
however, unlike most typical CRE, mobile refrigerated cabinets are not
continuously connected to a power supply. To better distinguish mobile
refrigerated cabinets from other defined categories of CRE, DOE is
considering developing definitions for this equipment.
Issue 32: DOE seeks information on the design features and
operating characteristics of mobile refrigerated cabinets that would
differentiate this equipment from other CRE or refrigerated salad bars,
buffet tables, and preparation tables.
In addition to definitions, DOE is considering whether to develop a
test procedure for mobile refrigerated cabinets. The operating
conditions, installation locations, and usage characteristics for this
equipment are likely very different compared to typical CRE. For
example, as discussed, mobile refrigerated cabinets are not
continuously connected to a power supply and may not have typical door
openings for user access. To determine appropriate test procedures to
evaluate the energy consumption of this equipment, DOE is requesting
information on any characteristics of their operation. DOE is not aware
of any industry standards that address performance of mobile
refrigerated cabinets.
Issue 33: DOE requests comment on what test conditions (e.g.,
temperature, moisture content) would be appropriate in a potential test
procedure for mobile refrigerated cabinets, given that this equipment
often operates in unique conditions and applications. DOE additionally
requests comment on appropriate specifications for door openings,
stabilization and test periods, and installation configurations for
mobile refrigerated cabinets (including representative operating times
when
[[Page 31190]]
connected and disconnected from a power supply). DOE seeks any data
describing how these units are used in the field to help inform
potential appropriate test conditions and procedures.
5. Additional Covered Equipment
DOE understands that there may be additional equipment available on
the market that meet the definition for CRE, but otherwise do not meet
the definitions for the existing equipment classes or additional
equipment categories described in this section. One such example may be
a unit used to chill and dispense condiments--for example cream in a
coffee shop. Such units would meet the general CRE definition but may
have different operation and customer use compared to equipment covered
under the existing CRE equipment categories (e.g., fewer door openings
only for re-loading the product).
Issue 34: DOE requests feedback from interested parties on what
other CRE may be available on the market that would require separate
equipment category definitions and test procedures. Specifically, DOE
seeks information on the relevant equipment features and utilities that
would require separate equipment categories, as well as the impact of
those features and utilities on energy use and whether the current test
procedure would provide results of those impacts. DOE also requests any
available information on potential definitions, test procedures, and
usage data (specifically, how the typical daily energy use of the
unique design compares to energy use of a unit of the most similar CRE
equipment class) for these equipment categories.
Issue 35: DOE also requests comment on whether it should establish
a definition for ``other refrigerated holding and serving equipment''
to clearly delineate equipment not currently subject to DOE's test
procedure. DOE seeks feedback on an appropriate definition, and on the
types of equipment it should cover.
Furthermore, DOE understands that there may be CRE that are
currently categorized into existing equipment classes but may require
different test requirements to reflect typical field usage. One example
may be CRE that are typically used in cafeteria settings to store and
provide access to cartons of milk, often referred to as ``milk
coolers.'' Milk coolers may have longer door openings during a
relatively short period of the day (i.e., ``lunch hour''). Another such
example may be CRE that are specifically designed to only operate
outdoors. Such units may operate in different real-world ambient
conditions compared to the other CRE (and the DOE test procedure).
Similarly, unique shelves or loading configurations may require
additional test instructions. For example, the DOE test procedure
loading requirements may not be appropriate (or possible) for floral
display merchandisers with unique shelf setups.
Issue 36: DOE requests feedback from interested parties on whether
any additional or different test requirements are needed for CRE that
meet the definitions for the existing equipment classes but may have
sufficiently unique applications from other equipment in the same
class. Specifically, DOE seeks information on how these requirements
should be addressed in the test procedure and how the equipment's
typical usage in the field is different than other CRE within the
respective equipment class. DOE also requests comment and information
on how it should be determined whether alternate test conditions should
apply.
Issue 37: DOE also requests comment on whether DOE could further
clarify the use of supplemental test instructions to address alternate
testing requirements for specific CRE applications in order to provide
more representative results.
D. Harmonization of Efficiency Standards and Testing With NSF 7-2019
Food Safety
NSF International (``NSF'') \10\/ANSI 7-2019, ``Commercial
Refrigerators and Freezers,'' (``NSF 7-2019'') establishes minimum food
protection and sanitation specifications for the materials, design,
manufacture, and performance of commercial refrigerators and freezers
and their related components. The current CRE test procedure allows
Type I (designed to operate in 75 [deg]F ambient conditions) and Type
II (designed to operate in 80 [deg]F ambient conditions) display
refrigerators to be tested at NSF conditions, provided that these
conditions result in higher energy consumption than the conditions
specified by the DOE test procedure. Appendix B, section 2.3. To that
end, the ambient temperature may be higher, but not lower than the DOE
test condition; and the IAT may be lower, but not higher, than that
measured at the DOE ambient test condition. Id. The test conditions,
and possible different thermostat settings, under NSF 7-2019 may result
in measured energy use that is more representative of average use in
applications for which users prioritize food safety over energy
efficiency. Permitting the use of the NSF 7-2019 test conditions may
also reduce testing burden for manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Founded in 1944 as the National Sanitation Foundation, the
organization changed its name to NSF International in 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 38: To ensure further that the DOE test procedure is
appropriately representative, and to potentially decrease manufacturer
test burden, DOE requests comment on ways in which the DOE test
procedure may be modified to better harmonize with NSF 7-2019, if
appropriate. DOE specifically requests comment on potential test
requirements related to food safety that could be specified to ensure
that equipment is tested as it would operate in the field.
E. Dedicated Remote Condensing Units
DOE is also aware of remote condensing CRE models where specific
dedicated condensing units are intended for use with specific
refrigerated cases. DOE has identified such equipment through
manufacturer literature, installation instructions, and vendor
information treating the entire system as a single model. In many of
these situations, the remote condensing units are intended to be
installed on or near the refrigerated case within the same conditioned
space. In other situations, the remote condensing units are intended to
be installed outdoors, but the refrigerated case is intended to be used
specifically with the designated remote condensing unit.
For this equipment, the combined refrigerated case and condensing
unit refrigeration system would effectively operate as if it were a CRE
with a self-contained condensing unit. Under the current DOE test
procedure, remote CRE energy consumption is determined from the energy
use of components in the refrigerated case plus a calculated compressor
energy consumption based on the enthalpy change of refrigerant supplied
to the case at specified conditions. The compressor energy use
calculation is based on typical reciprocating compressor energy
efficiency ratios (``EERs'') at a range of operating conditions. See
Table 1 in AHRI 1200-2010. For CRE used with dedicated condensing
units, the actual compressor used during normal operation is known
(i.e., the compressor in the dedicated condensing unit). Accordingly,
testing the whole system using the same approach as required for a
self-contained CRE may produce energy use results that are more
representative of how this equipment actually operates in the field.
Additionally, testing such a system as a complete system rather than
using the test procedures for remote condensing units may be less
burdensome because
[[Page 31191]]
it would not require use of a test facility capable of maintaining the
required liquid and suction line refrigerant conditions as currently
required for testing remote CRE (i.e., the refrigerant conditions
consistent with the ASHRAE 72-2005 requirements and at the conditions
necessary to maintain the appropriate case temperature for testing).
Issue 39: DOE seeks feedback on whether CRE with dedicated remote
condensing units should be tested to evaluate the performance of the
paired condensing unit and refrigerated case, rather than assuming a
condensing unit EER as specified in the AHRI 1200 standards.
Issue 40: DOE requests information on how to identify whether
testing with a dedicated remote condensing unit is appropriate for a
particular system (rather than the typical remote CRE testing under the
existing approach). For example, such testing could be required only
when manufacturers specify specific dedicated remote condensing units
for use with a remote refrigerated case.
Issue 41: DOE requests comment on appropriate test installations
and conditions for testing CRE with paired remote condensing units. For
example, both the refrigerated case and dedicated remote condensing
unit could be installed within the same conditioned space, resulting in
a test similar to that required for CRE with self-contained condensing
units.
Refrigerated cases do not always specify dedicated remote
condensing units with which to be matched. Having performance
information for both the refrigerated cases and separate dedicated
remote condensing units would allow users to compare the performance of
both parts of the system when matched.
Issue 42: DOE also requests comment on whether, and if so how,
users of CRE consider the energy performance of the system in instances
in which a specific dedicated remote condensing unit is not identified
for a refrigerated case. DOE requests comment on potential approaches
to evaluate the energy performance of dedicated remote condensing units
independent of their use with specific refrigerated cases.
F. Test Procedure Clarifications and Modifications
1. Defrost Cycles
The test period requirements in ASHRAE 72-2005, incorporated by
reference in the current CRE test procedure, and in ASHRAE 72-2018
require starting the 24-hour test period with a defrost after steady-
state conditions are achieved.\11\ This method introduces a degree of
variability in the measured energy consumption when the 24-hour period
does not end at the end of a complete defrost cycle (the period from
one defrost to the next) (i.e., the test period captures a portion of a
defrost cycle rather than complete defrost cycles). Typically, if
multiple complete defrost cycles occur within the 24-hour period, the
impact of capturing partial defrost cycles is small. Similarly, if the
defrost cycle duration is slightly greater than 24-hours, the impact of
capturing a partial defrost cycle will be small. However, the impact
may be more substantial if the defrost cycle duration is very long
(i.e., multiple days between defrost) or if the defrost cycle is
slightly less than 24 hours (i.e., the test period would capture two
defrost occurrences but only one period of ``normal'' operation between
defrosts). DOE also notes that ASHRAE 72-2005 does not have any
provisions for addressing the possibility of CRE with variable defrost
control schemes (i.e., defrosts that may be triggered based on
conditions or other parameters rather than only a timer) or CRE with no
automatic defrost (i.e., manual defrost).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ ASHRAE 72-2005 and ASHRAE 72-2018 define steady state as
the condition where the average temperature of all test simulators
changes less than 0.4 [deg]F from one 24-hour period or
refrigeration cycle to the next.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has addressed similar issues in the test procedures for
consumer refrigeration products. The test procedures for those products
apply a two-part test period (one period for steady-state operation and
one period to capture events related to the defrost cycle) to account
for defrost energy consumption for products with long defrost cycle
durations or with variable defrost control. The energy use calculations
then weight the performance from each test period based on the known
compressor runtime between defrosts or based on a calculated average
time between defrosts in field operation that is based on the control
parameters for variable defrosts. See appendices A and B to subpart B
of 10 CFR part 430.
Additionally, DOE has addressed testing of certain commercial units
that do not have automatic defrost in a waiver granted to AHT Cooling
Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc. (``AHT'') published on
October 30, 2018. 83 FR 54581. For basic models subject to the waiver
the test period begins after steady state conditions occur (instead of
beginning with a defrost cycle) and that the door-opening period begin
3 hours after the start of the test (instead of 3 hours after a defrost
cycle). 83 FR 54581, 54583. DOE also granted AHT an interim waiver for
testing certain models with defrost cycles longer than 24 hours. 82 FR
24330 (May 26, 2017; ``May 2017 Interim Waiver''). The interim waiver
requires that AHT test the specified models using a two-part test
method similar to the method for consumer refrigerators, with the first
part capturing normal compressor operation between defrosts, including
an 8-hour period of door openings, and the second part capturing all
operation associated with a defrost, including any pre-cooling or
temperature recovery following the defrost. 82 FR 24330, 24332-24333.
Issue 43: DOE requests comment on the impact of the potential
defrost cycle variability and whether the test period should be revised
to minimize the effects of defrost cycle duration for certain
equipment. DOE additionally requests comment and supporting data on how
incorporating a two-part test procedure may impact measured energy
consumption, test burden, and repeatability and reproducibility.
Additionally, DOE requests information on the availability of equipment
with variable defrost control and the control schemes employed in those
models, if any are available. DOE requests comment on whether the
approach granted to AHT in the May 2017 Interim Waiver may better
measure the representative energy use of CRE over complete defrost
cycles compared to the current 24-hour test period.
With regard to CRE models with multiple evaporators (and therefore,
potentially multiple defrosts) connected to a single or multi-stage
condensing unit, ASHRAE 72-2005 does not specify which evaporator
should be used to determine the defrost cycle that initiates the test.
Additionally, if the defrost cycles for multiple evaporators do not
activate at the same time during the test, ASHRAE 72-2005 does not
specify which defrost cycle should be used to determine the start of
the 24-hour test period. ASHRAE 72-2005 also does not explicitly
address the treatment of defrost cycles for multi-compartment CRE
models (i.e., hybrid CRE) with different evaporator temperatures and
defrost sequences.
The DOE test procedure for consumer refrigeration products also
addresses products with multiple evaporators and multiple defrosts. In
that test procedure, the second (i.e., defrost) part of the test period
is conducted separately for each defrost occurrence. Section 4.2.4 of
10 CFR part 430 subpart B appendix A. Similar to the two-part test
described
[[Page 31192]]
earlier in this section, the energy use calculations weight each
individual defrost test period with the steady-state test period using
the known compressor runtime between each defrost type or based on a
calculated average time between defrosts. Section 5.2.1.5 of 10 CFR
part 430 subpart B appendix A.
Issue 44: DOE requests information regarding the types of defrost
systems that exist in CRE available on the market and how manufacturers
currently select test periods for models with multiple evaporators with
non-synchronous defrost cycles. DOE requests comment on any potential
modifications that could be made to the CRE test procedure in order to
increase representativeness and provide additional detail for testing
these units, including whether the two-part approach, as described
earlier in this section, would be appropriate.
2. Total Display Area
Section 3.2 of Appendix B provides instructions regarding the
measurement of TDA. That section specifies that TDA is the sum of the
projected area(s) of visible product, expressed in ft\2\ (i.e.,
portions through which product can be viewed from an angle normal, or
perpendicular, to the transparent area).
For certain CRE configurations, merchandise is not necessarily
located at an angle directly normal, or perpendicular, to the
transparent area despite the transparent area being intended for
customer viewing. For example, for service over counter ice-cream
freezers, the ice cream containers may be placed within the chest
portion of the refrigerated case, with a glass display panel on the
front and glass rear doors located above the merchandise storage area.
If the glass display areas are nearly vertical, the ice cream
containers may be positioned low enough in the case that they are not
at a viewing angle perpendicular to the glass. However, during typical
use, customers would stand close enough to the display glass that the
ice cream would be visible from other angles not perpendicular to the
glass. Accordingly, DOE is considering whether additional TDA
instructions are necessary to capture the intended display function of
this equipment.
Issue 45: DOE seeks feedback on whether the TDA definition and test
instructions should account for display areas in which the merchandise
is not at a location normal to the display surface. If so, DOE requests
information on how to define the revised display area.
Issue 46: DOE also requests comment on other CRE applications or
configurations for which the TDA, as currently defined, may not
adequately represent the display functionality of the equipment.
G. Alternative Refrigerants
DOE's current test procedure for remote condensing CRE requires the
estimation of compressor EER from Table 1 of AHRI 1200-2010. The EER
ratings in the table are based on performance of reciprocating
compressors and were developed based on refrigerants that historically
have been commonly used for CRE (i.e., R-404A).
Certain remote CRE installations can use carbon dioxide
(``CO2'') as the refrigerant; however, the existing remote
CRE test procedure likely does not address the unique operation for
these systems. For example, the current DOE test procedure requires an
inlet refrigerant liquid temperature of 80 [deg]F with a saturated
liquid pressure corresponding to a condensing temperature of 89.6
[deg]F to 120.2 80 [deg]F. See ASHRAE 72-2005, sections 4.3.2 and
4.3.3. CO2 has a critical point of 87.8 [deg]F and 1,070
pounds per square inch (``psi''), above which it is a supercritical
fluid. Accordingly, CO2 cannot be a liquid at the specified
condensing temperature conditions (i.e., it would either be a gas or
supercritical fluid, depending on pressure). Additionally,
CO2 systems typically include multiple stages of compression
and cooling, resulting in liquid supplied to the refrigerant cases at
conditions not necessarily defined by the typical condensing unit
conditions. DOE has recently granted a Decision and Order to address
similar CO2 operating conditions for testing walk-in cooler
and walk-in freezer unit coolers. 86 FR 14487 (March 19, 2021). That
Decision and Order approach requires liquid inlet saturation
temperature and liquid inlet subcooling of 38 [deg]F and 5 [deg]F,
respectively. 86 FR 14487, 14489. The Decision and Order also maintains
the existing compressor energy consumption determination based on an
approach consistent with the CRE remote calculations using AHRI 1200-
2010 (the walk-in requirements instead refer to the walk-ins rating
standard, AHRI 1250-2009, which includes the same EER table as AHRI
1200-2020). Id.
Issue 47: DOE requests information on the typical conditions for
remote CRE intended for use with CO2 refrigerant. DOE
requests comment and data on the applicability of the EER values in
Table 1 of AHRI 1200-2010 to the typical compressor EERs for
CO2 refrigerant systems.
Issue 48: DOE also requests information and supporting data on
whether the existing test procedure is appropriate for any other
alternative refrigerants that may be used for remote CRE. DOE requests
feedback on whether the operating conditions specified in ASHRAE 72-
2005 or the standardized EER values in Table 1 of AHRI 1200-2010 should
be revised to account for operation with any other alternative
refrigerants. DOE also requests usage data regarding the range of
refrigerants in the remote CRE market.
H. Certification of Compartment Volume
The current certification requirements specified in 10 CFR 429.42
require manufacturers to certify compartment volumes for certain
equipment classes of CRE. DOE's current test procedure incorporates by
reference AHAM HRF-1-2008 to measure compartment volume. DOE
acknowledges that manufacturers often use computer aided designs
(``CAD'') to in designing their equipment. Using the CAD as the basis
for determining compartment volumes may be particularly helpful when
the geometric designs of the CRE make physical measurements in
accordance with AHAM HRF-1-2008 difficult. DOE is considering whether
it should allow CRE manufacturers to certify compartment volumes using
CAD drawings. Currently, DOE's certification requirements in 10 CFR
part 429 include provisions for certifying volume for basic models of
consumer refrigeration products, commercial gas-fired and oil-fired
instantaneous water heaters, and hot water supply boilers using CAD
drawings. 10 CFR 429.72(c), (d), and (e).
Issue 49: DOE requests comment on whether allowing manufacturers to
certify compartment volumes for CRE basic models using CAD drawings
would introduce any testing or certification issues. DOE also seeks
information on the extent to which the use of CAD drawings may reduce
manufacturer test burden.
I. Test Procedure Waivers
A person may seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for
a particular basic model of a type of covered equipment when the basic
model for which the petition for waiver is submitted contains one or
more design characteristics that: (1) Prevent testing according to the
prescribed test procedure, or (2) cause the prescribed test procedures
to evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true
energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate
comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1).
[[Page 31193]]
DOE has granted test procedures waivers for the current CRE test
procedure. On September 12, 2018, DOE published a test procedure for
ITW Food Equipment Group, LLC (``ITW'') for testing specified grocery
and general merchandise system (i.e., refrigerated storage allowing for
order storage and customer pickup) basic models which have unique
operating characteristics including floating suction temperatures for
individual compartments, different typical door-opening cycles, and a
high-temperature ``ambient'' compartment. 83 FR 46148. As discussed in
section II.E.1, DOE has granted AHT a test procedure waiver to allow
for testing specified basic models that do not have defrost cycle
capability when operated in freezer mode. 83 FR 54581. Additionally,
also discussed in section II.E.1, DOE has granted AHT an interim test
procedure waiver for testing certain models with defrost cycles longer
than 24 hours. 82 FR 24330.
The test procedure waivers for these CRE basic models have
addressed provisions in the test procedures that would evaluate subject
basic models in a manner so unrepresentative of their true energy
consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate
comparative data.
Issue 50: DOE requests feedback on whether the test procedure
waiver approaches for the ITW and AHT petitions are generally
appropriate for testing basic models with these features.
III. Submission of Contents
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by the date
specified in the DATES heading, comments and information on matters
addressed in this RFI and on other matters relevant to DOE's early
assessment of whether an amended test procedure for CRE is warranted
and if so, what such amendments should be.
Submitting comments via https://www.regulations.gov. The https://www.regulations.gov web page requires 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 https://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
https://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 https://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 https://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted via
email also will be posted to https://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 in 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. No telefacsimiles (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. Pursuant 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 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. DOE will make its own determination about the
confidential status of the information and treat it according to its
determination.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information 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].
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on June 4,
2021, by Kelly Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
and Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy.
That document with the original signature and date is maintained by
DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE
Federal
[[Page 31194]]
Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for publication, as an official document
of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way
alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on June 7, 2021.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2021-12160 Filed 6-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P