[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13901-13910]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05230]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 13901]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE-2019-BT-TP-0025]
RIN 1904-AE55
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial
Prerinse Spray Valves
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule incorporates by reference the current version
of the industry testing standard for commercial prerinse spray valves,
which will not substantively change the current test procedure. The
Department of Energy (``DOE'') also amends the definition of commercial
prerinse spray valve to codify existing guidance on how to apply the
definition. This amended definition do not change the current scope of
the test procedure.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is April 11, 2022. The final
rule changes will be mandatory for product testing starting September
7, 2022. The incorporation by reference of certain material listed in
this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on April
11, 2022.
ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov.
All documents in the docket are listed in the 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.
A link to the docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2019-BT-TP-0025. The docket web page contains instructions
on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the
docket.
For further information on how to review the docket contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by
email: [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC, 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-0371. Email:
[email protected].
Ms. Kathryn McIntosh, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC,
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2002. Email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE incorporates by reference the following
industry standard into 10 Code of Federal Regulations (``CFR'') part
431:
ASTM F2324-13 (R2019), ``Standard Test Method for Prerinse Spray
Valves;'' Approved May 1, 2019 (``ASTM F2324-13'').
Copies of ASTM F2324-13 (R2019) can be obtained from ASTM
International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken,
PA 19428-2959, (610) 832-9585 or by going to www.astm.org.
For a further discussion of this standard, see section IV.N of this
document.
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Scope and Definition
B. Updates to Industry Standards
C. Water Pressure
D. Test Procedure Costs
E. Effective and Compliance Dates
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Commercial prerinse spray valves (``CPSVs'') are included among the
``covered products'' for which the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'')
is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards and
test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6291(33); 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(14); 42 U.S.C.
6295(dd)) DOE's energy conservation standards and test procedures for
commercial prerinse spray valves are currently prescribed at 10 CFR
part 431, subpart O.\1\ The following sections discuss DOE's authority
to establish test procedures for CPSVs and relevant background
information regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures for this
product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Because Congress included commercial prerinse spray valves
in Part B of Title III of EPCA, the consumer product provisions of
Part B (rather than the industrial equipment provisions of Part C)
apply to commercial prerinse spray valves. However, because
commercial prerinse spray valves are commonly considered to be
commercial equipment, as a matter of administrative convenience and
to minimize confusion among interested parties, DOE codified the
requirements for commercial prerinse spray valves into subpart O of
10 CFR part 431. Part 431 contains DOE regulations for commercial
and industrial equipment. DOE refers to commercial prerinse spray
valves as either ``products'' or ``equipment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\2\
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 \3\ 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. EPCA
[[Page 13902]]
provides definitions for commercial prerinse spray valves under 42
U.S.C. 6291(33), the test procedure under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(14), and
energy conservation standards for flow rate under 42 U.S.C. 6295(dd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 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).
\3\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The energy conservation program under EPCA 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),
test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294),
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
The testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for (1)
certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy
conservation standards adopted under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2)
making representations about the efficiency of those products (42
U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to
determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards
promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
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))
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 shall be reasonably designed to produce test
results which measure energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use
cycle (as determined by the Secretary) or period of use and shall not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
With respect to CPSVs, EPCA requires DOE to use ASTM International
(``ASTM'') F2324 (``ASTM F2324'') as the basis for the test procedure
for measuring flow rate. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(14))
EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered product, including CPSVs, 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 her 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
final rule in satisfaction of the 7-year review requirement specified
in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
B. Background
DOE's existing test procedures for CPSVs appear at 10 CFR 431.264.
DOE most recently amended the test procedure for CPSVs in a final rule
published December 30, 2015, in which DOE incorporated by reference the
2013 version of ASTM F2324 (``ASTM F2324-13''). 80 FR 81441 (``December
2015 Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
test procedures for CPSVs. (Docket No. EERE-2019-BT-TP-0025, which
is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged
as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number, page of that
document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 5, 2020, DOE published a request for information soliciting
public comment and data on all aspects of the existing DOE test
procedure for CPSVs. 85 FR 34541 (``June 2020 RFI''). DOE published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') for the test procedure on May
20, 2021, presenting DOE's proposals to amend the CPSV test procedure.
86 FR 27298 (``May 2021 NOPR''). DOE held a public meeting related to
this NOPR on June 9, 2021.
DOE received comments in response to the May 2021 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.
Table I.1--Written Comments Received in Response to May 2021 NOPR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in this
Commenter(s) final rule Commenter type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appliance Standards Awareness ASAP and NRDC..... Efficiency
Project and Natural Resources Organizations.
Defense Council.
Northwest Energy Efficiency NEEA.............. Efficiency
Alliance. Organization.
Pacific Gas and Electric CA IOUs........... Utilities.
Company, Southern California
Edison, and San Diego Gas and
Electric Company; collectively,
the California Investor-Owned
Utilities.
Plumbing Manufacturers PMI............... Trade
International. Organization.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\4\
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
In this final rule, DOE amends 10 CFR 431.264, ``Uniform test
method for the measurement of flow rate for commercial prerinse spray
valves,'' as follows:
Amends the definition of ``commercial prerinse spray
valve'' to codify existing guidance on how to apply the definition; and
[[Page 13903]]
Incorporates by reference the current industry standard--
ASTM F2324-13 (R2019), ``Standard Test Method for Prerinse Spray
Valves.''
Explicitly permits voluntary testing using a test pressure
other than the test pressure required for determining compliance with
the standards at 10 CFR part 431.
The adopted amendments are summarized in Table II.1, including a
comparison to the test procedure before amendment, as well as the
reason for the adopted change.
Table II.1--Summary of Changes in the Amended Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE test procedure prior to
amendment Amended test procedure Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A ``commercial prerinse spray A ``commercial Codify existing
valve'' is defined as ``a prerinse spray guidance
handheld device that has a valve'' is defined as regarding scope
release-to-close valve and is ``a handheld device of definition.
suitable for removing food that has a release-to-
residue from food service close valve and is
items before cleaning them in suitable for removing
commercial dishwashing or food residue from
ware washing equipment.''. food service items
before cleaning them
in commercial
dishwashing or ware
washing equipment
based on any or all
of the following:
(1) Equipment design
and representations
(for example, whether
equipment is
represented as being
capable of rinsing
dishes as compared to
equipment that is
represented
exclusively for
washing walls and
floors or animal
washing);.
(2) Channels of
marketing and sales
(for example, whether
equipment is marketed
or sold through
outlets that market
or sell to food
service entities);.
(3) Actual sales
(including whether
the end-users are
restaurants or
commercial or
institutional
kitchens, even if
those sales are
indirectly through an
entity such as a
distributor).
References industry standard References reaffirmed Harmonize with
ASTM F2324-13. industry standard current
ASTM F2324-13 (2019). industry
standard.
Requires testing at 60 pounds Requires testing at 60 Response to
per square inch (``psi''). psi and explicitly stakeholder
permits voluntary comment.
testing at other
water pressures.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has determined that the amendments described in section III of
this document and adopted in this document will not alter the measured
efficiency of CPSVs or require retesting or recertification solely as a
result of DOE's adoption of the amendments to the test procedures.
Additionally, DOE has determined that the amendments will not increase
the cost of testing. Discussion of DOE's actions are addressed in
detail in section III of this document.
The effective date for the amended test procedures adopted in this
final rule is 30 days after publication of this document in the Federal
Register. Representations of energy use or energy efficiency must be
based on testing in accordance with the amended test procedures
beginning 180 days after the publication of this final rule.
III. Discussion
A. Scope and Definition
``Commercial prerinse spray valve'' is defined at 10 CFR 431.262 as
``a handheld device that has a release-to-close valve and is suitable
for removing food residue from food service items before cleaning them
in commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment.'' DOE notes that
EPCA defines ``commercial prerinse spray valve'' as ``a handheld device
designed and marketed for use with commercial dishwashing and ware
washing equipment that sprays water on dishes, flatware, and other food
service items for the purpose of removing food residue before cleaning
the items.'' 42 U.S.C. 6291(33)(A) In the December 2015 Final Rule, DOE
observed that some products were being designed by the manufacturer for
other specific applications but were marketed to rinse dishes before
washing. 80 FR 81441, 81443. Accordingly, DOE amended the definition of
commercial prerinse spray valve to provide more explicit direction that
any spray valve ``suitable'' for prerinsing purposes is subject to
energy conservation standards in order to ensure a level and fair
playing field for all products serving commercial prerinse spray valve
applications. 80 FR 81441, 81443-81444.
In the preamble of the December 2015 Final Rule, DOE provided
additional guidance on the various factors that DOE would consider in
determining whether a spray valve model is ``suitable'' for removing
food residue from food service items before cleaning them in commercial
dishwashing or ware washing equipment. Id. at 80 FR 81444.
Specifically, DOE would consider factors including (1) product design
and descriptions (including how the product is identified and described
in product catalogs, brochures, specification sheets, and
communications with prospective purchasers); (2) channels of marketing
and sales (for example, a product marketed or sold through outlets that
market or sell to food service entities such as restaurants or
commercial or institutional kitchens is more likely to be used as a
commercial prerinse spray valve than one marketed or sold through
outlets catering to pet care. Similarly, a product marketed outside of
the United States as a commercial prerinse spray valve, or for similar
use in a kitchen-type setting, would be considered suitable for use as
a commercial prerinse spray valve); and (3) actual sales (including
whether the end-users are restaurants or commercial or institutional
kitchens, even if those sales are indirectly through an entity such as
a distributor, to determine whether the spray valve is used extensively
in conjunction with commercial dishwashing and ware washing equipment).
Id.
In response to the June 2020 RFI, NEEA commented that there were
valves on the market that appeared to meet the definition of commercial
prerinse spray valve and either had marketed flow rates above the
energy conservation standard and/or were not being certified to DOE.
(NEEA, No. 6 at p. 1) To provide further certainty as to the definition
of ``commercial prerinse spray valve,'' in the May 2021 NOPR DOE
proposed to amend the definition of ``commercial prerinse spray valve''
to codify the guidance that had been provided in the December 2015
Final Rule for determining whether equipment is suitable for removing
food
[[Page 13904]]
residue from food service items before cleaning them in commercial
dishwashing or ware washing equipment. 86 FR 27298, 27301-27302.
Specifically, DOE proposed to define a ``commercial prerinse spray
valve'' as a handheld device that has a release-to-close valve and is
suitable for removing food residue from food service items before
cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment. DOE
may determine that a device is suitable for removing food residue from
food service items before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or
ware washing equipment based on any or all of the following: (1)
Equipment design and representations (for example, whether equipment is
represented as being capable of rinsing dishes as compared to equipment
that is represented exclusively for washing walls and floors); (2)
Channels of marketing and sales (for example, whether equipment is
marketed or sold through outlets that market or sell to food service
entities); (3) Actual sales.'' 86 FR 27298, 27302. DOE tentatively
determined that the proposed definition would not change the scope of
coverage. Id. Rather, the proposal would only codify in the CFR the
existing guidance on how to apply the definition.
ASAP, NRDC and NEEA commented that the proposed definition adds
clarity and reduces the risk of misclassification of commercial
prerinse spray valves. (ASAP and NRDC, No. 10 at p. 1; NEEA, No. 12 at
pp. 1-2) ASAP and NRDC commented that there are many CPSV models that
appear to meet the current definition of a CPSV, yet do not meet the
efficiency standards that DOE previously prescribed. These commenters
believe that considerable water savings are likely being lost due to
non-compliant products and believe that the definition DOE proposed in
the NOPR encompasses the CPSV models in violation and will help close
loopholes in the current standards. (ASAP and NRDC, No. 10 at p. 1;
Webinar Transcript, No. 9 at p. 14)
NEEA stated that the first two criteria provide clarity that
products marketed for use as a prerinse valve (no matter where they are
sold) and valves sold via commercial kitchen retailers (even if they
are marketed as ``utility'' valves) meet the definition of a CPSV and
therefore must meet the CPSV regulated flow rates; and the third
criteria clarifies that valves sold and installed in CPSV applications
also meet the criteria of a CPSV no matter where they were sold or how
they were marketed. (NEEA, No. 12 at p. 2)
The CA IOUs generally supported the proposed definition for CPSVs,
stating that it is likely to reduce the risk of misclassification of
higher flow valves not intended for food service prerinse applications.
(CA IOUs, No. 11 at p. 4) The CA IOUS also stated that some ambiguity
could still exist under DOE's proposed definition for certain products
meant for other applications like washing walls. The CA IOUs
recommended adding that CPSVs are ``intended to be installed in
fixtures with a faucet or overhead pull-down hose over a multi-
compartment sink, wash-down trough, or a scrapping device.'' (CA IOUs,
No. 11 at p. 5)
PMI opposed the proposed definition, claiming that manufacturers
would no longer have a clear definition by which to produce and sell
CPSVs, and would instead rely on a subjective set of requirements that
would be left up to the discretion of DOE to apply and enforce, leading
to confusion. (PMI, No. 13 at pp. 1-2; Webinar Transcript, No. 9 at pp.
12-13) PMI commented that NEEA's comment in response to the June 2020
RFI demonstrates that use of the word ``suitable'' has led to confusion
in the market and scrutiny of products that were never intended for
food service applications. Id. PMI asserted that manufacturers
submitted comment during the previous rulemaking recommending that DOE
define the term ``suitable'' in order to ensure only products intended
to be used as CPSVs are regulated as such. Id. PMI recommended
modifying the current definition by replacing the phrase ``is suitable
for removing'' with the phrase ``intended by the manufacturer to
remove.'' Id.
PMI further asserted that manufacturers provide clear statements on
their websites, and within their product literature, regarding which
products are intended to meet DOE's current CPSV regulations. (PMI, No.
13 at p. 2; Webinar Transcript, No. 9 at p. 13) PMI provided four
examples of product literature: (1) A product with a represented 1.15
gallon per minute (``gpm'') flow rate marketed as ``SUITABLE for
removing food residue from food service items before cleaning them in
commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment''; (2) a product with
a represented 2.45 gpm flow rate marketed as ``NOT SUITABLE for
removing food residue from food service items before cleaning them in
commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment''; (3) a product with
a represented 1.07 gpm flow rate marketed as ``EPAct/DOE Compliant''
and ``2019 DOE PRSV--Class II compliant''; and (4) a product
represented with a 5.6 gpm flow rate marketed as ``Not Intended for USA
Pre-Rinse.'' Id.
PMI additionally commented that manufacturers will incur additional
costs if they are required to meet energy conservation standards for
products not intended for removing food residue, such as washdown
equipment or pet grooming equipment. (Id.; Webinar Transcript, No. 9 at
p. 13)
Regarding the CA IOUs' suggestion to base the CPSV definition on
the intended location for installing the fixture, intent suggests
subjectivity, which not only reduces regulatory transparency but also
creates challenges for enforcement. DOE has previously rejected such an
approach. 80 FR 81441, 81443. As discussed in the notice of proposed
rulemaking to the December 2015 Final Rule, DOE has also observed
products marketed as ``pull-down kitchen faucet'' or ``commercial style
prerinse,'' which generally are handheld devices that can be used for
commercial dishwashing or ware washing regardless of intended
installation location. 80 FR 35874, 35876 (Jun. 23, 2015). DOE notes
that these categories of products typically do not have a release-to-
close valve and therefore generally do not meet the definition of
commercial prerinse spray valve. However, if such a product does have a
release-to-close valve, it would meet the definition of commercial
prerinse spray valve regardless of intended installation location,
provided it were being sold through channels of marketing that sell to
food service entities.
In response to comments regarding lack of clarity around the term
``suitable,'' DOE notes that neither DOE nor manufacturers have
identified any physical characteristics that would distinguish valves
suitable for removing food residue from food service items before
cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment from
other valves. In the absence of any physical identifying
characteristics that could be used to distinguish a CPSV, DOE
articulated in the December 2015 Final Rule the means by which DOE
would consider a spray valve to be ``suitable'' for removing food
residue from food service items before cleaning them in commercial
dishwashing or ware washing equipment. 80 FR 81441, 81443-81445 The
intent of DOE's proposal in the May 2021 NOPR to codify this guidance
as part of the CPSV definition is to provide manufacturers with greater
certainty as to how DOE would determine whether a particular spray
valve model is covered by the scope of DOE's CPSV test procedure and
[[Page 13905]]
energy conservation standards. As stated, the intent is not to amend
the scope of the definition. 86 FR 27298, 27302.
In response to the suggestion by PMI that the definition of CPSV
reference the use of the equipment as intended by the manufacturer, DOE
notes that the definition of CPSV as defined by EPCA references how the
device is ``designed and marketed for use'' without limiting
consideration of the marketed use to that of the manufacturer. (42
U.S.C. 6291(33)(A)) As discussed in the December 2015 Final Rule, DOE
observed instances in which products designed by the manufacturer for
other specific applications were marketed on retailer websites for
commercial dishwashing and ware washing. 80 FR 81441, 81443. This, in
part, prompted DOE to codify a definition of CPSV that replaces the
term ``designed and marketed for use'' with the phrase ``suitable for
use.'' Id. 80 FR 81444. DOE's prior observations of the market have
demonstrated that statements of manufacturer intent may not correspond
to how such products are marketed by third-party distributors, or how
such products would be used by the consumer. DOE research indicates
that a large majority of CPSVs are sold through third-party
distributors. Without any physical features that would distinguish
between types of potential end uses, a definition that is limited to
manufacturer intent, as suggested by PMI, would ignore the marketing
practice of third-party distributors that likely influences how many of
these products are used. As noted in the preamble of the December 2015
Final Rule and May 2021 NOPR, DOE also may consider actual sales,
including whether the end-users are restaurants or commercial or
institutional kitchens, even if those sales are indirectly through an
entity such as a distributor. 86 FR 27298, 27301-27302 and 80 FR 81441,
81444. The amended definition explicitly provides, consistent with the
discussion in the May 2021 NOPR, that spray valves with actual sales to
commercial prerinse applications may be considered suitable even if
those sales are through a third-party distributor.
With regard to the concern expressed by PMI that manufacturers
would incur additional costs if products not intended for removing food
residue (such as washdown equipment or pet grooming products) are
required to meet the CPSV energy conservation standards--the revised
definition proposed by DOE and adopted in this final rule does not
change the scope of the definition. The amendment to the definition of
CPSV adopted in this final rule codifies the guidance DOE has
previously provided on the factors to consider when determining whether
a valve is suitable for removing food residue from food service items
before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or ware washing
equipment. If a spray valve model is not represented as being capable
of rinsing dishes, is not marketed or sold through outlets that market
or sell to food service entities, and is not sold to end-users that are
restaurants or commercial or institutional kitchens, is not a CPSV. A
spray valve that a manufacturer markets exclusively for wall washing
and floors (i.e., washdown equipment) is an example of a device that
would not be a CPSV because it is not represented as being capable of
rinsing dishes and therefore would not be considered suitable for
removing food residue from food service items before cleaning them in
commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment). Similarly, the
amended definition includes spray valves represented exclusively for
animal washing as an example of valves that are not CPSVs.
For the reasons described in the May 2021 NOPR and reiterated in
this final rule, and in consideration of comments from interested
parties, DOE is amending the definition of ``commercial prerinse spray
valve'' to mean ``a handheld device that has a release-to-close valve
and is suitable for removing food residue from food service items
before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or ware washing
equipment. DOE may determine that a device is suitable for removing
food residue from food service items before cleaning them in commercial
dishwashing or ware washing equipment based on any or all of the
following: (1) Equipment design and representations (for example,
whether equipment is represented as being capable of rinsing dishes as
compared to equipment that is represented exclusively for washing walls
and floors or for animal washing); (2) Channels of marketing and sales
(for example, whether equipment is marketed or sold through outlets
that market or sell to food service entities); (3) Actual sales
(including whether the end-users are restaurants or commercial or
institutional kitchens, even if those sales are indirectly through an
entity such as a distributor).''
B. Updates to Industry Standards
The CPSV test procedure incorporates by reference ASTM F2324-13 at
10 CFR 431.263. The specific sections of ASTM F2324-13 that are
specified in the test method in 10 CFR 431.264 are the test methods for
measuring flow rate at Sections 6.1 through 6.9 (except 6.4 and 6.7),
9.1 through 9.4, and 10.1 through 10.2.5 of ASTM F2324-13. 10 CFR
431.264(b)(1). The DOE test procedure incorporates the corresponding
calculations in Section 11.3.1 of ASTM F2343-13. For the spray force
test method, the DOE test procedure references Sections 6.2, 6.4
through 6.9, 9.1 through 9.5.3.2, and 10.3.1 through 10.3.8 of ASTM
F2324-13. 10 CFR 431.264(b)(2).
In the May 2021 NOPR, DOE proposed to update the DOE test procedure
to reference the reaffirmed industry testing standard, ASTM F2324-13
(R2019), and tentatively determined that such a change would not result
in any substantive changes to the existing CPSV test procedure. 86 FR
27298, 27302.
The CA IOUs and PMI both commented that they support DOE
incorporating the reaffirmed industry test standard. (CA IOUs, No. 11
at p. 5; PMI, No. 13 at p. 2; Webinar Transcript, No. 9 at p. 15) PMI
commented that incorporating the reaffirmed industry standard would not
lead to any additional costs. (PMI, No. 23 at p. 2) DOE did not receive
any comments opposing incorporation of the reaffirmed industry standard
ASTM F2324-13 (2019). For the reasons discussed in the May 2021 NOPR,
DOE is updating the incorporation by reference in the CPSV test
procedure to reference the reaffirmed industry standard, ASTM F2324-13
(R2019).
C. Water Pressure
ASTM F2324-13 specifies testing CPSVs at a water pressure of 60
2 pounds per square inch (``psi'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The latest version of the industry standard, ASTM F2324-13
(R2019), that DOE is incorporating by reference in this document
also specifies testing with a water pressure at 60 2
psi.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the May 2021 NOPR, DOE stated that it did not receive any data
suggesting that a different test pressure would be more representative
and noted that the DOE test pressure aligns with the industry-consensus
standard. 86 FR 27298, 27302-27303. Therefore, DOE proposed maintaining
testing with a dynamic water pressure \6\ of 60 2 psi.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Dynamic water pressure refers to the water pressure when
water is flowing. For the DOE test procedure, this is measured
upstream of the CPSV. In this notice, dynamic water pressure can be
assumed when referencing water pressure unless explicitly stated to
be ``static'' pressure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE received several comments suggesting a different water pressure
may be appropriate and one suggesting an additional labeling
requirement. NEEA encouraged DOE to review
[[Page 13906]]
available data to ensure that 60 psi is not higher than the average
water pressure. (NEEA, No. 12 at p. 3) The CA IOUs commented that its
investigation of four field studies indicates an average dynamic water
pressure of 52 psi, and that their analysis of these field studies
indicates that more than one third of the sites with CPSVs with flow
rates of 1.28 gpm had pressures less than 50 psi, while only 16 percent
had flow pressures over 60 psi. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at pp. 2-3) The CA
IOUs further commented that model plumbing codes adopted by most states
limit the maximum static pressure \7\ at the meter at 80 psi. The CA
IOUs estimated that this would result in a dynamic pressure of around
66 psi. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at p. 3) The CA IOUs further commented that
several cities require a minimum static pressure of 30 psi, which the
CA IOUs estimate would result in a minimum dynamic pressure of 25 psi.
Id. Based on these estimates of the maximum and minimum expected water
pressures, the CA IOUs suggested, at least for Class 1 products, that
testing CPSVs at 40 psi would provide a good indication of water use at
the low end of pressures. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at pp. 3-4) The CA IOUs
commented that although 50 psi would be more representative of an
average pressure in commercial kitchens, given that current standards
are based on testing at 60 psi, an additional test at 40 psi should be
added to represent the lower end of pressures experienced in commercial
kitchens. Id. at p. 4 The CA IOUs asserted that an additional test at
40 psi would not be unduly burdensome for manufacturers to conduct. Id.
Finally, the CA IOUs recommended that DOE consider requiring a label on
CPSVs denoting the tested flow rate at 40 psi in addition to labeling
with the tested flow rate at 60 psi, to enable consumers to purchase
products best suited for their operational needs and building
constraints, while maximizing energy and water savings. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Static water pressure refers to the water pressure when
water is not flowing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEEA commented that low water pressure is an important
consideration when installing a CPSV, as dissatisfied CPSV users are
known to replace low-flow valves with higher flow valves in order to
achieve the performance they need. (NEEA, No. 12 at pp. 2-3) NEEA
stated that with the current test pressure of 60 psi, consumers with
lower water pressure do not have the information they need to know if a
valve will perform as they need it to before purchasing and installing
it. Id. at p. 3 NEEA recommended that DOE adopt an optional
informational test pressure of 40 psi that would provide a consistent
point of comparison for products looking to highlight and differentiate
performance at lower pressures and would provide a foundation for
voluntary labeling programs at the state or national level. Id.
As an accompaniment to the December 2015 Final Rule, DOE provided a
separate report titled ``Analysis of Water Pressure for Testing
Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves Final Report,'' \8\ in which DOE
collected data from studies that reported pressures and flow rates for
typical CPSV applications to determine the representative water
pressure for testing commercial prerinse spray valves. The report
concluded that the flow rate of CPSVs can vary by almost 40 percent
when the water pressure changes from 40 psi to 80 psi. Based on the
data, the weighted average dynamic water pressure was estimated to be
around 55 psi, which resulted in a 4-percent decrease in flow rate as
compared to the flow rate of a CPSV installed with a water pressure of
60 psi. (Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-TP-0055-0008 at p. 4-5) Thus, the
weighted average pressure of the available data is sufficiently similar
to the prescribed test pressure in the industry test procedure.
Accordingly, DOE determined that 60 psi is sufficiently representative
of the water pressures CPSVs will experience in the field. 80 FR 81441,
81447.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The water pressure sensitivity analysis is available at
www.regulations.gov under docket number EERE-2014-BT-TP-0055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the December 2015 Final Rule, DOE acknowledged that water
pressure will affect the flow rate of a CPSV once installed. 80 FR
81441, 81446. Typically, lower pressures result in lower flow rates and
higher pressures result in higher flow rates. Nevertheless, DOE noted
that testing at a single specific water pressure to demonstrate
compliance with the maximum allowable flow rate would create a
consistent and standardized reference that would be comparable across
all models Id. DOE also noted that requiring testing at multiple water
pressures would increase the test burden. Id. Additionally, a review of
industry testing standards indicated that testing at lower water
pressures was typically for the purpose of determining a minimum flow
rate. Id.
As discussed, the requirement in 10 CFR 431.264 to test at 60
2 psi is based on ASTM F2324, which is an industry
consensus standard that includes input from a wide variety of national
stakeholders and was corroborated with the data compiled for the
December 2015 Final Rule. The data cited by the CA IOUs are largely
consistent with the data previously presented by DOE in support of the
December 2015 Final Rule. DOE has not received any new data indicating
that an alternative test pressure would be more representative. Because
the weighted average pressure of the available data is sufficiently
similar to the prescribed test pressure in the industry test procedure,
DOE reaffirms its prior conclusion that a 60-psi test pressure is
sufficiently representative of the water pressures CPSVs will
experience in the field. Moreover, testing at a single test pressure is
appropriate for measuring flowrate for determination of compliance with
the maximum flow rate applicable under the energy conservation
standards. Based on the reasons discussed in this section, DOE has
decided to maintain the current test pressure of 60 2 psi.
With regard to the suggestions to add a second test at a test
pressure of 40 psi, DOE recognizes that some consumers may value
representations of flow rate corresponding to other water pressures
than 60 psi. DOE has determined, however, that requiring all
manufacturers to perform an additional test at a pressure of 40 psi,
for mandatory energy conservation standards and/or a mandatory labeling
requirement as suggested by the CA IOUs, would be unduly burdensome,
because this would require manufacturers to retest and recertify all
CPSVs and the current test pressure is representative of average use.
However, based on the comments received from NEEA and the CA IOUs in
response to DOE's request for data regarding water pressure, DOE
recognizes that representations of flow rate at pressures other than 60
psi may provide useful information to consumers at the lower end of the
water pressure range. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is explicitly
providing for optional testing at test pressures other than the
required 60 2 psi. Specifically, DOE is establishing a new
paragraph (d) of 10 CFR 431.264, which provides that manufacturers may
voluntarily test pursuant to the DOE test procedure using other test
pressures in addition to the 60 psi test pressure required for
determining compliance with the standards at 10 CFR part 431. When
making voluntary representations, manufacturers must represent flow
rate at alternative water pressures in accordance with the sampling
plan at 10 CFR 429.51(a); however, manufacturers are not required to
submit certification reports for voluntary representations.
[[Page 13907]]
D. Test Procedure Costs
In this final rule, DOE amends the test procedures for CPSVs to
amend the definition of CPSV to clarify the current scope, incorporate
by reference the reaffirmed industry standard, ASTM F2324-13 (R2019),
and explicitly permit voluntary testing at alternative water pressures.
As discussed, the amendment to the definition of ``commercial
prerinse spray valve'' codifies DOE guidance on factors for determining
whether a spray value is suitable for removing food residue from food
service items before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or ware
washing equipment. The amendment does not change the scope of the
definition or the scope of the test procedure and energy conservation
standards.
DOE has determined that the reaffirmed industry standard, ASTM
F2324-13 (R2019), is not substantively different from the prior version
referenced by the DOE test procedure. As such, reference to ASTM F2324-
13 (R2019) will not change how the testing CPSVs is conducted and would
not impact the measured values of water use or spray force used to
determine compliance with standards. Regarding voluntary
representations, the provisions providing for testing at additional
water pressures are optional only.
Accordingly, DOE has determined that these adopted amendments will
not be unduly burdensome for manufacturers to conduct. Further, DOE has
determined that the adopted test procedure amendments will not impact
testing costs already experienced by manufacturers.
E. Effective and Compliance Dates
The effective date for the adopted test procedure amendment will be
30 days after publication of this final rule in the Federal Register.
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 the final rule in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) 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 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.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has determined this
test procedure rulemaking does not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order (``E.O.'') 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
OMB.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) for any
final rule where the agency was first required by law to publish a
proposed rule 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 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on
February 19, 2003 to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on
small entities are properly considered during the DOE rulemaking
process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available
on the Office of the General Counsel's website: energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
As stated, the amendments adopted in this final rule revise the
definition of CPSVs without modifying the scope and update references
to the reaffirmed industry standard, which made no substantive changes
to the test procedure. DOE has determined that the adopted test
procedure amendments would not impact testing costs already experienced
by manufacturers.
The amendments adopted in this final rule would do not have
significant economic impact on small businesses. 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'').\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The size standards are listed by NAICS code and industry
description and are available at: www.sba.gov/document/support--
table-size-standards (Last accessed on December 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NAICS code for commercial prerinse spray valve manufacturing is
covered under NAICS code 332919, other metal valve and pipe fitting
manufacturing. The SBA employee threshold for small businesses for
NAICS code 332919 is 750 employees or less.
DOE collected data from DOE's compliance certification database to
identify manufacturers of commercial prerinse spray valves.\10\ DOE
identified 13 companies that sell commercial prerinse spray valves
covered by this rulemaking. To identify if these companies were small
manufacturers, DOE used markets research tools (e.g., D&B Hoovers,
Glassdoor, LinkedIn) to estimate employment and determine whether
companies met the SBA's definition of a small business. Two of these
companies are large businesses with more than 750 total employees.
Therefore, DOE determined that there are 11 companies that meet SBA's
definition of a small business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Certified equipment in the CCD are listed by product class
and can be accessed at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/#q=Product_Group_s%3A* (Last accessed December 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, DOE concludes that the cost effects accruing from this
final rule would not have a ``significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,'' and that the preparation of a
FRFA is not warranted. DOE has submitted a 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).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of CPSVs 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 CPSVs (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
[[Page 13908]]
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.
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this final rule, DOE establishes test procedure amendments that
it expects will be used to develop and implement future energy
conservation standards for CPSVs. DOE has determined that this rule
falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from
review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021.
Specifically, DOE has determined that adopting test procedures for
measuring energy efficiency of consumer products and industrial
equipment is consistent with activities identified in 10 CFR part 1021,
appendix A to subpart D, A5 and A6. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4,
1999), imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and
implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that
have federalism implications. The Executive order requires agencies to
examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any
action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and
to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The Executive order
also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.
On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the
development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE examined this final
rule and determined that it will not have a substantial direct effect
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
products that are the subject of this final rule. States can petition
DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on
criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is
required by Executive Order 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
this final rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``UMRA'')
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a regulatory action resulting in a rule that may cause the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available
at energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this final rule
according to UMRA and its statement of policy and determined that the
rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that
may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so
these requirements do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This final rule will not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity
of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it
is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation will not
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by
[[Page 13909]]
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). Pursuant to
OMB Memorandum M-19-15, Improving Implementation of the Information
Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE published updated guidelines which
are available at www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has
reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy action. A
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final
rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under Executive
Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any significant energy action, the
agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy
supply, distribution, or use if the regulation is implemented, and of
reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
This regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has
it been designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator
of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and,
accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788;
``FEAA'') Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where
a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the
notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and
background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE
to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal
Trade Commission (``FTC'') concerning the impact of the commercial or
industry standards on competition.
The amendments to the test procedure for CPSVs adopted in this
final rule incorporates testing methods contained in certain sections
of the following commercial standard: ASTM F2324-13 (R2019). DOE has
evaluated this standard and is unable to conclude whether it fully
complies with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA (i.e.,
whether it was developed in a manner that fully provides for public
participation, comment, and review.) DOE has consulted with both the
Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC about the impact on
competition of using the methods contained in these standards and has
received no comments objecting to their use.
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of this rule before its effective date. The report will
state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
In this final rule, DOE incorporates by reference the test standard
published by ASTM, titled ``Standard Test Method for Prerinse Spray
Valves,'' ASTM Standard F2324-13 (R2019). ASTM F2324-13 (R2019) is an
industry-accepted test procedure that measures water flow rate and
spray force for CPSVs and is applicable to product sold in North
America. Specifically, the test procedure codified by this final rule
references various sections of ASTM F2324-13 (R2019) that address test
set-up, instrumentation, test conduct, and calculations.
Copies of ASTM F2324-13 (R2019) can be obtained from ASTM
International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken,
PA 19428-2959, (610) 832-9585 or by going to www.astm.org.
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation test procedures, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on March 6,
2022, by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy 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 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 March 8, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Section 431.262 is amended by revising the definition for
``Commercial prerinse spray valve'' to read as follows:
Sec. 431.262 Definitions.
* * * * *
Commercial prerinse spray valve means a handheld device that has a
release-to-close valve and is suitable for removing food residue from
food service items before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or
ware washing equipment. DOE may determine that a device is suitable for
removing food residue from food service items before cleaning them in
commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment based on any or all of
the following:
[[Page 13910]]
(1) Equipment design and representations (for example, whether
equipment is represented as being capable of rinsing dishes as compared
to equipment that is represented exclusively for washing walls and
floors or animal washing);
(2) Channels of marketing and sales (for example, whether equipment
is marketed or sold through outlets that market or sell to food service
entities);
(3) Actual sales (including whether the end-users are restaurants
or commercial or institutional kitchens, even if those sales are
indirectly through an entity such as a distributor).
* * * * *
0
3. Section 431.263 is transferred from under the undesignated center
heading ``Test Procedures'' to immediately following Sec. 431.262 and
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 431.263 Materials incorporated by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subpart
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other
than that specified in this section, the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) must publish a document in the Federal Register and the material
must be available to the public. All approved material is available for
inspection at the DOE and at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). Contact DOE at: The U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies
Program, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20024, (202)
586-9127, or [email protected], https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/building-technologies-office. For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, email: [email protected],
or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. The
material may be obtained from the source(s) in the following
paragraph(s) of this section.
(b) ASTM. ASTM, International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box
C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, (610) 832-9585, or go to
www.astm.org.
(1) ASTM F2324-13 (R2019) (``ASTM F2324''),''Standard Test Method
for Prerinse Spray Valves'', Approved May 1, 2019; IBR approved for
Sec. 431.264.
(2) [Reserved]
0
4. Section 431.264 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and adding
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 431.264 Uniform test method to measure flow rate and spray force
of commercial prerinse spray valves.
* * * * *
(b) Testing and calculations for a unit with a single spray
setting--(1) Flow rate. (i) Test each unit in accordance with the
requirements of Sections 6.1 through 6.9 (Apparatus) (except 6.4 and
6.7), 9.1 through 9.4 (Preparation of Apparatus), and 10.1 through
10.2.5 (Procedure) of ASTM F2324, (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
431.263). Precatory language in ASTM F2324 is to be treated as
mandatory for the purpose of testing. In Section 9.1 of ASTM F2324, the
second instance of ``prerinse spray valve'' refers to the spring-style
deck-mounted prerinse unit defined in Section 6.8. In lieu of using
manufacturer installation instructions or packaging, always connect the
commercial prerinse spray valve to the flex tubing for testing.
Normalize the weight of the water to calculate flow rate using Equation
1 to this paragraph, where Wwater is the weight normalized
to a 1 minute time period, W1 is the weight of the water in
the carboy at the conclusion of the flow rate test, and t1
is the total recorded time of the flow rate test.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11MR22.000
(ii) Perform calculations in accordance with Section 11.3.1
(Calculation and Report) of ASTM F2324. Record the water temperature
([deg]F) and dynamic water pressure (psi) once at the start for each
run of the test. Record the time (min), the normalized weight of water
in the carboy (lb) and the resulting flow rate (gpm) once at the end of
each run of the test. Record flow rate measurements of time (min) and
weight (lb) at the resolutions of the test instrumentation. Perform
three runs on each unit, as specified in Section 10.2.5 of ASTM F2324,
but disregard any references to Annex A1. Then, for each unit,
calculate the mean of the three flow rate values determined from each
run. Round the final value for flow rate to two decimal places and
record that value.
(2) Spray force. Test each unit in accordance with the test
requirements specified in Sections 6.2 and 6.4 through 6.9 (Apparatus),
9.1 through 9.5.3.2 (Preparation of Apparatus), and 10.3.1 through
10.3.8 (Procedure) of ASTM F2324. In Section 9.1 of ASTM F2324, the
second instance of ``prerinse spray valve'' refers to the spring-style
deck-mounted prerinse unit defined in Section 6.8. In lieu of using
manufacturer installation instructions or packaging, always connect the
commercial prerinse spray valve to the flex tubing for testing. Record
the water temperature ([deg]F) and dynamic water pressure (psi) once at
the start for each run of the test. In order to calculate the mean
spray force value for the unit under test, there are two measurements
per run and there are three runs per test. For each run of the test,
record a minimum of two spray force measurements and calculate the mean
of the measurements over the 15-second time period of stabilized flow
during spray force testing. Record the time (min) once at the end of
each run of the test. Record spray force measurements at the resolution
of the test instrumentation. Conduct three runs on each unit, as
specified in Section 10.3.8 of ASTM F2324, but disregard any references
to Annex A1. Ensure the unit has been stabilized separately during each
run. Then for each unit, calculate and record the mean of the spray
force values determined from each run. Round the final value for spray
force to one decimal place.
* * * * *
(d) Test procedure for voluntary representations. Follow paragraph
(b)(1) or (2) or (c) of this section, as applicable, using test water
pressure(s) of interest for voluntary representations of flow rate.
Representations made at a water pressure other than the required test
water pressure cannot replace a representation at the required test
water pressure specified in Section 9.1 of ASTM F2324. Any voluntary
representation of flow rate made pursuant to this paragraph shall
specify the water pressure associated with the represented flow rate.
[FR Doc. 2022-05230 Filed 3-10-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P