[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 43 (Monday, March 6, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14014-14045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03987]



[[Page 14013]]

Vol. 88

Monday,

No. 43

March 6, 2023

Part IV





Department of Energy





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





10 CFR Parts 429 and 430





Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Air Cleaners; Final 
Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 2023 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 14014]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430

[EERE-2021-BT-TP-0036]
RIN 1904-AF26


Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Air Cleaners

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes definitions, a test procedure, and 
sampling and representation requirements for air cleaners. Currently, 
air cleaners are not subject to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) test 
procedures or energy conservation standards. DOE is establishing a test 
procedure for measuring the integrated energy factor of air cleaners. 
The test method references the relevant industry standard, with certain 
modifications.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is April 5, 2023.
    The incorporation by reference of certain materials listed in the 
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on April 5, 
2023.

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public 
meeting webinar 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, not all documents listed in the 
index may be publicly available, such as those containing information 
that is exempt from public disclosure.
    A link to the docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2021-BT-TP-0036. 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]">ApplianceStandards[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Troy Watson, 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: 
(240) 449-9387. Email: [email protected]">ApplianceStandards[email protected].
    Ms. Amelia Whiting, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2588. Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE incorporates by reference the following 
industry standards into part 430:

    ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2020, ``Method for Measuring Performance of 
Portable Household Electric Room Air Cleaners,'' ANSI-approved 
December 2020, including AHAM Standard Interpretation on September 
19, 2022 (AHAM AC-1-2020).
    AHAM AC-7-2022, ``Energy Test Method for Consumer Room Air 
Cleaners,'' copyright 2022.
    Copies of AHAM AC-7-2022 and AHAM AC-1-2020 can be obtained from 
the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM), 1111 19th 
Street NW, Suite 402, Washington, DC 20036; or www.aham.org/AHAM/AuxStore.
    ASTM E741-11(2017), ``Standard Test Method for Determining Air 
Change in a Single Zone Means of a Tracer Gas Dilution,'' Approved 
September 1, 2017.
    Copies of ASTM E741-11(2017) can be obtained from ASTM 
International (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West 
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, or www.astm.org.
    IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0, ``Household electrical appliances--
Measurement of standby power,'' Edition 2.0, 2011-01.

    Copies of IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 can be obtained from the International 
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 3 Rue de Varembe, Case Postale 131, 
1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland; or webstore.iec.ch.
    See section IV.N of this document for a further discussion of these 
standards.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
    A. General Comments
    B. Scope of Applicability
    C. Industry Standards Incorporated by Reference
    1. AHAM AC-1-2020 and AHAM AC-7-2022
    2. Other Industry Standards
    D. Definitions
    E. Test Conditions
    1. Electrical Supply
    2. Ambient Conditions
    3. Test Chamber Air Exchange Rate
    4. Test Chamber Particulate Matter Concentrations
    5. Test Chamber Construction and Equipment
    6. Test Unit Preparation
    7. Test Unit Placement for Testing
    8. Network Functionality
    F. Instrumentation
    G. Active Mode Testing
    1. Particulate Used for Testing and CADR Measurements
    2. Performance Mode for Testing
    3. Secondary Functions
    4. Power Measurement Procedure
    5. Pollen CADR
    6. Consumer Use Hours
    H. Standby Mode Testing
    I. Integrated Energy Factor Metric
    J. Effective Room Size
    K. Sampling Plan
    L. Test Procedure Costs
    M. Effective and Compliance Dates
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    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

    On July 15, 2022, DOE published a final determination (July 2022 
Final Determination) in which it determined that air cleaners qualify 
as a ``covered product'' under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 
as amended (EPCA).\1\ 87 FR 42297. DOE determined in the July 2022 
Final Determination that coverage of air cleaners is necessary or 
appropriate to carry out the purposes of EPCA, and that the average 
U.S. household energy use for air cleaners is likely to exceed 100 
kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. Id. Currently, no energy conservation 
standards or test procedures are prescribed by DOE for air cleaners. 
The following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish test 
procedures for air cleaners and relevant background information 
regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures for this equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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), which reflects the last statutory amendments that impact 
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Authority

    EPCA 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 of EPCA \2\

[[Page 14015]]

established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other 
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to 
improve energy efficiency, referred to as ``covered products.'' \3\ In 
addition to specifying a list of consumer products that are covered 
products, EPCA contains provisions that enable the Secretary of Energy 
to classify additional types of consumer products as covered products. 
(42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) To classify a consumer product as a covered 
product, the Secretary must determine that classifying the product as a 
covered product is necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes 
of EPCA and the average annual per household \4\ energy use by products 
of such type is likely to exceed 100 kWh (or British thermal unit (Btu) 
equivalent) per year. (42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
    \3\ The enumerated list of covered products is at 42 U.S.C. 
6292(a)(1)-(19).
    \4\ DOE has defined ``household'' to mean an entity consisting 
of either an individual, a family, or a group of unrelated 
individuals, who reside in a particular housing unit. For the 
purpose of this definition: Group quarters means living quarters 
that are occupied by an institutional group of 10 or more unrelated 
persons, such as a nursing home, military barracks, halfway house, 
college dormitory, fraternity or sorority house, convent, shelter, 
jail, or correctional institution. Housing unit means a house, an 
apartment, a group of rooms, or a single room occupied as separate 
living quarters, but does not include group quarters. Separate 
living quarters means living quarters: to which the occupants have 
access either: directly from outside of the building, or through a 
common hall that is accessible to other living quarters and that 
does not go through someone else's living quarters, and occupied by 
one or more persons who live and eat separately from occupant(s) of 
other living quarters, if any, in the same building. 10 CFR 430.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated, DOE has determined that air cleaners are covered 
products. 87 FR 42297.
    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 other 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))
    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.
    In addition, EPCA requires that DOE amend its test procedures for 
all covered products to integrate measures of standby mode and off mode 
energy consumption into the overall energy efficiency, energy 
consumption, or other energy descriptor, unless the current test 
procedure already incorporates the standby mode and off mode energy 
consumption, or if such integration is technically infeasible. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) If an integrated test procedure is technically 
infeasible, DOE must prescribe separate standby mode and off mode 
energy use test procedures for the covered product, if a separate test 
is technically feasible. (Id.) Any such amendment must consider the 
most current versions of the IEC Standard 62301 \5\ and IEC Standard 
62087 \6\ as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ IEC 62301, Household electrical appliances--Measurement of 
standby power (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
    \6\ IEC 62087, Audio, video and related equipment--Methods of 
measurement for power consumption (Edition 1.0, Parts 1-6: 2015, 
Part 7: 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE is publishing this final rule consistent with its authority and 
these obligations.

B. Background

    DOE has not previously conducted a test procedure rulemaking for 
air cleaners. As stated, DOE determined in the July 2022 Final 
Determination that: coverage of air cleaners is necessary or 
appropriate to carry out the purposes of EPCA; the average U.S. 
household energy use for air cleaners is likely to exceed 100 kWh per 
year; and thus, air cleaners qualify as a ``covered product'' under 
EPCA. 87 FR 42297.
    On January 25, 2022, DOE published a request for information 
(January 2022 RFI) seeking comments on potential test procedure and 
energy conservation standards for air cleaners. 87 FR 3702.
    On August 23, 2022, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient 
Economy (ACEEE), Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), AHAM, 
Consumer Federation of America (CFA), Natural Resources Defense Council 
(NRDC), New York State Energy Research and Development Authority 
(NYSERDA), and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), collectively, 
the ``Joint Stakeholders,'' submitted a ``Joint Statement of Joint 
Stakeholder Proposal On Recommended Energy Conservation Standards And 
Test Procedure For Consumer Room Air Cleaners'' (Joint Proposal), which 
includes negotiated energy conservation standards for air cleaners and 
the related test procedures.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Available as document number 16 in the docket for this 
rulemaking.

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

[[Page 14016]]

    DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) for the test 
procedure on October 18, 2022 (October 2022 NOPR), presenting DOE's 
proposals to establish a test procedure for air cleaners. 87 FR 63324. 
DOE held a public meeting related to this NOPR on November 9, 2022 
(hereafter, the NOPR public meeting).
    DOE received comments in response to the October 2022 NOPR from the 
interested parties listed in Table I.1. This list excludes non-
substantive comments submitted to the docket.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ EERE-2021-BT-TP-0036-0021.

           Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the October 2022 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Comment number
             Commenter(s)                Reference in this final rule     in the docket       Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous............................  Anonymous.......................              19  Individual.
Robert Frey..........................  Frey............................              22  Individual.
Madison Indoor Air Quality...........  MIAQ............................              26  Manufacturer.
Dyson, Inc...........................  Dyson...........................              27  Manufacturer.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.  NEEA............................              28  Efficiency
                                                                                          Organization.
Asthma and Allergy Foundation of       AAFA............................              29  Health Organization.
 America.
PG&E, San Diego Gas & Electric, and    CA IOUs.........................              30  Utilities.
 Southern California Edison;
 collectively, the California
 Investor-Owned Utilities.
Carrier Global Corporation...........  Carrier.........................              31  Manufacturer.
Home Ventilating Institute...........  HVI.............................              32  Trade Association.
Air-Conditioning, Heating, &           AHRI............................              33  Trade Association.
 Refrigeration Institute.
ACEEE, ASAP, AHAM, CFA, NRDC, NYSERDA  Joint Commenters................              34  Efficiency
                                                                                          Organizations,
                                                                                          Consumer Organization,
                                                                                          and Trade Association.
Daikin U.S. Corporation..............  Daikin..........................              35  Manufacturer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or 
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\9\ 
To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments 
that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided 
during the NOPR public meeting, DOE cites the written comments 
throughout this final rule. Any oral comments provided during the 
webinar that are not substantively addressed by written comments are 
summarized and cited separately throughout this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop 
test procedures for air cleaners. (Docket No. EERE-2021-BT-TP-0036, 
which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references are 
arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number, page 
of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule

    In this final rule, DOE establishes a new test procedure at 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, appendix FF (appendix FF) for air cleaners that 
would include methods to (1) measure the performance of the covered 
product and (2) use the measured results to calculate an integrated 
energy factor (IEF) to represent the energy efficiency of an air 
cleaner.
    The test procedure established by this final rule includes 
measurements of smoke clean air delivery rate (CADR) and dust CADR, 
which are used to calculate PM2.5 \10\ CADR, and active mode 
and standby mode power consumption, which are used to calculate annual 
energy consumption (AEC). PM2.5 CADR and AEC are required to 
calculate IEF. Newly established appendix FF also includes measurements 
of pollen CADR and calculation of effective room size for 
representation purposes. For consistent and uniform measurement of 
these values, DOE is incorporating by reference the industry standards 
AHAM AC-7-2022, AHAM AC-1-2020, and IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0. Specifically, 
DOE is specifying the following provisions from within the referenced 
industry standards:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ ``PM2.5'' refers to particulate matter that are 
nominally 2.5 micrometers ([mu]m) in width or smaller. ``Smoke'' 
refers to cigarette smoke as defined in section 3.3.1 of AHAM AC-1-
2020, which means smoke produced by burning cigarette tobacco with 
air forced through the cigarette's filter having particle sizes 
detected from 0.01 [mu]m to 1.0 [mu]m diameter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) From AHAM AC-7-2022, the following items:
    (a) Definition of ``conventional room air cleaners'' in 10 CFR 
430.2, which is used to specify the scope of the air cleaners test 
procedure in the new appendix FF;
    (b) Definitions of terms that are relevant to the test procedure;
    (c) Test setup requirements for electrical supply and test chamber, 
which additionally include a reference to AHAM AC-1-2020;
    (d) Instrumentation requirements for power measuring instruments 
and temperature and relative humidity measuring devices;
    (e) Active mode and standby mode power measurements; the standby 
mode power measurement method additionally includes a reference to IEC 
62301 Ed. 2.0 for the test conduct; and
    (f) Calculations for PM2.5 CADR, AEC, and IEF.
    (2) From AHAM AC-1-2020, test methods for determining the pollen 
CADR, smoke CADR, and dust CADR; calculation of effective room size; 
and test chamber construction and equipment.
    This final rule also specifies the sampling plan and 
representations for air cleaners at 10 CFR 429.67. DOE also specifies 
rounding requirements for the measured and calculated values of the air 
cleaners test procedure.
    DOE has determined that the new test procedure described in section 
III of this document and adopted in this final rule will produce 
measurements of energy use that are representative of an average use 
cycle and are not unduly burdensome to conduct. Discussion of DOE's 
actions are addressed in detail in section III of this document. 
Additionally, DOE provides estimates of the cost of testing in section 
III.L of this document. DOE notes that there are currently no energy 
conservation standards prescribed for air cleaners.
    The effective date for the new test procedure adopted in this final 
rule is 30 days after publication of this document in the Federal 
Register. Beginning on the compliance date of any energy conservation 
standards for air cleaners, any representations with respect to the 
energy use or efficiency of

[[Page 14017]]

these products, including those made for certification purposes, must 
be made in accordance with the test procedure established in this final 
rule.

III. Discussion

A. General Comments

    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE presented its proposed test procedure 
for air cleaners and requested stakeholder feedback on several topics 
including test procedure scope, industry standards, definitions, test 
conditions, instrumentation, active and standby mode tests, 
representations, and sampling plan. 87 FR 63324. While DOE addresses 
topic-specific comments in the following sections, general comments are 
summarized in the following paragraphs.
    An anonymous commenter stated that the government should not impose 
regulations on air cleaners because of its private use, commerce, and 
own power costs. Individuals use such devices for many different 
purposes, including medical needs, stress inducing factors, or 
maintaining overall health. The anonymous commenter stated that 
regulation would force consumers to shut down machines that they need 
in order to function efficiently on a daily basis. Additionally, the 
anonymous commenter suggested rules could stop the manufacturing and 
commerce of certain products and create difference between different 
manufacturers within the market by forcing a net loss to some companies 
and not others. According to the anonymous commenter, a large pivotal 
governmental role in regulating areas of commerce goes against the free 
market put in place. Lastly, the anonymous commenter stated that the 
operation of the device depends on the user including power and 
electricity cost, and it is up to the individual, not the government, 
of what funds should be allocated in certain areas of the individual's 
choosing. (Anonymous, No. 19 at p. 1)
    DOE determined in the July 2022 Final Determination that coverage 
of air cleaners is necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes 
of EPCA, and that the average U.S. household energy use for air 
cleaners is likely to exceed 100 kWh per year, thereby establishing air 
cleaners as a type of consumer product that is a covered product under 
EPCA. 87 FR 42297. EPCA specifies that the Secretary may, in accordance 
with its provisions for amended and new test procedures, prescribe test 
procedures for any consumer product classified as a covered product 
under 42 U.S.C. 6292(b). (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(B)) As discussed in 
section I.A of this document, 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2) provides that 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. DOE has fulfilled this requirement by publishing the 
October 2022 NOPR after receiving the Joint Proposal submitted by the 
Joint Stakeholders. Furthermore, the range of interested parties that 
submitted the Joint Proposal indicates widespread support for 
establishing a test procedure and standards for air cleaners. DOE is 
finalizing a test procedure for air cleaners in this document. 
Additionally, this test procedure will not impact the use, 
availability, manufacturing, or manufacturers of air cleaners because 
this rulemaking is not establishing any energy conservation standards. 
If DOE develops energy conservation standards for air cleaners, it 
would not require consumers to shut down the products they already own. 
Additionally, DOE will evaluate the impact of any potential standards 
on the use, availability, manufacturing, or manufacturers of air 
cleaners. DOE has analyzed the impact of this rulemaking on small 
businesses, as discussed in section IV.B of this document. Furthermore, 
while DOE is not specifying any regulation regarding individual use of 
funds, certain performance metrics in the air cleaners test procedure 
established by this final rule may assist consumers in their purchasing 
decisions.
    The Joint Commenters stated that they are largely supportive of 
DOE's proposed test procedure and urged DOE to finalize the test 
procedure quickly. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 2) During the 
October 2022 webinar, ASAP stated that it appreciates that DOE has 
worked swiftly to publish this proposal, which is based on the 
recommendations presented by the Joint Stakeholders earlier this year. 
(ASAP, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 5)
    The Joint Commenters also commented that the Joint Proposal was 
reviewed and supported by small and large manufacturers and achieved 
consensus by both types of manufacturers. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at 
p. 7)
    The Joint Commenters requested that DOE publish final rules 
adopting the air cleaner test procedure and standards before December 
31, 2022, otherwise each of the Joint Stakeholders reserved the right 
to rescind support for the standards and compliance dates in the Joint 
Proposal. The Joint Commenters commented that the Joint Proposal urged 
DOE to rely upon the exception in section 8(d)(2)(ii) of the Process 
Rule to finalize the test procedure quickly and eliminate the time 
between finalizing the test procedure and the end of the comment period 
on a direct final rule on energy conservation standards for room air 
cleaners. (Joint Commenters No. 34, at pp. 1-2; AHAM, Public Meeting 
Transcript, No. 25 at p. 48)
    The CA IOUs commended DOE for moving quickly on the rulemaking and 
aligning with the Joint Stakeholder recommendations submitted in August 
2022, which included broad support for adopting AHAM AC-7-2022 as the 
test procedure for air cleaners and the IEF metric, expressed in terms 
of PM2.5 CADR per watt (CADR/W), as the preferred 
performance metric. The CA IOUs expressed appreciation for the fact 
that DOE aligned with the Joint Stakeholder recommendation, and the CA 
IOUs requested that DOE show the same consideration by publishing an 
expeditious direct final rule based on these recommendations. (CA IOUs, 
No. 30 at pp. 1-2)
    Daikin supported DOE's test procedure for conventional air cleaners 
due to a growing demand for these products. Daikin also supported DOE's 
efforts to quickly finalize this regulation to prevent additional U.S. 
states from implementing policies that may be different than the 
Federal policy. (Daikin, No. 35 at p. 1)
    As discussed throughout this document, DOE has addressed feedback 
from the Joint Commenters and other stakeholders in finalizing the test 
procedure for air cleaners. Additionally, DOE has worked as 
expeditiously as feasible, within its obligations under EPCA, to 
finalize the test procedure for air cleaners. DOE is considering energy 
conservation standards in a rulemaking proceeding separate from this 
test procedure rulemaking.

B. Scope of Applicability

    DOE defines air cleaner as a product for improving indoor air 
quality, other than a central air conditioner, room air conditioner, 
portable air conditioner, dehumidifier, or furnace, that is an 
electrically-powered, self-contained, mechanically encased assembly 
that contains means to remove, destroy, or deactivate particulates, 
VOCs, and/or microorganisms from the air. It excludes products that 
operate solely by means of ultraviolet light without a fan for air 
circulation. 10 CFR 430.2.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to establish test procedures 
for

[[Page 14018]]

a subset of products that meet the definition of ``air cleaner'' as 
established by the July 2022 Final Determination. Specifically, DOE 
proposed to define the scope of the proposed new test procedure as 
covering products defined as ``conventional room air cleaners'' in the 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft \11\ standard. The proposed scope of the test 
procedure aligned with the available industry standard and encompasses 
a majority of the air cleaner market. 87 FR 63324, 63328. Further, this 
scope is consistent with the scope in the Joint Proposal. (Joint 
Proposal, No. 16 at p. 5) In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE additionally 
noted that DOE may consider test procedures for other types of air 
cleaners in a future rulemaking. 87 FR 63324, 63328.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ At the time of publication of the October 2022 NOPR, AHAM 
AC-7-2022 was available as a Final Draft standard. As discussed in 
section III.C.1 of this document, the published AHAM AC-7-2022 is 
substantively the same as AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft referenced in the 
October 2022 NOPR, other than two minor edits to the instrumentation 
requirements. This document refers to AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft when 
referring to the October 2022 NOPR discussion and AHAM AC-7-2022 
otherwise. AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft that was referenced in the October 
2022 NOPR is available at: www.aham.org/ItemDetail?iProductCode=30014&Category=PADSTD&websiteKey=69a0a5fb-295a-4894-acd0-5785f146b899.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 defines a ``conventional room air 
cleaner'' as a consumer room air cleaner that is a portable or wall 
mounted (fixed) unit that plugs in to an electrical outlet; operates 
with a fan for air circulation; and contains means to remove, destroy, 
and/or deactivate particulates.
    Sections 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.3.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 further define 
``portable'' and ``fixed,'' respectively, as follows:
    Portable: can be easily moved from one place to another for use; 
and has no provision for permanent mounting. Tools are not required for 
the product installation or removal.
    Fixed: permanently connected to the electrical supply source; 
permanently mounted, such that tools are required for the product 
installation or removal; or, sized so that it is not easily moved from 
one place to another.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to specify in section 1 of 
the proposed new appendix FF that the test procedure applies to 
``conventional room air cleaners'' and to define that term in 10 CFR 
430.2 through reference to section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. DOE 
further proposed to add references to sections 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.3.2 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to the proposed definition of conventional room 
air cleaners to reference the definitions of portable and fixed 
conventional room air cleaners. 87 FR 63324, 63328.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
define the scope of the proposed new air cleaner test procedure as 
those air cleaners that meet the definition of a conventional room air 
cleaner as defined in section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. DOE also 
requested comment on its proposal to reference sections 2.1.1, 2.1.3.1, 
and 2.1.3.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft in 10 CFR 430.2 for the definitions 
of conventional room air cleaner, portable conventional room air 
cleaner, and fixed conventional room air cleaner, respectively. Id.
    AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposed definitions in AHAM 
AC-7-2022 for ``conventional room air cleaner,'' ``portable,'' and 
``fixed'' with a CADR limit of 600 cubic feet per minute (cfm). (AHRI, 
No. 33 at p. 1) Daikin commented that it generally agreed with the 
scope and definitions used to describe the specific air cleaners in the 
scope of the proposed test procedure with a CADR limit of 600 cfm. 
(Daikin, No. 35 at p. 1)
    Carrier stated its agreement with DOE's proposal to define the 
scope of the test procedure to conventional room air cleaners, but 
commented there could be confusion if DOE were to adopt section 2.1.1 
of AHAM AC-7-2022 verbatim because it does not explicitly state whether 
ceiling mounted air cleaners are included. Carrier requested that 
``ceiling mounted'' air cleaners be added to the section 2.1.1 
definition of a ``conventional room air cleaner.'' (Carrier, No. 31 at 
p. 2)
    During the NOPR public meeting, Acuity Brands asked whether a wall 
mounted product that is permanently connected to the electrical supply 
source and a ceiling mounted product would be included in the scope of 
the test procedure. (Acuity Brands, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 
at p. 12)
    During the NOPR public meeting, LifeAire asked if an in-duct system 
would be within the scope of the test procedure. (LifeAire, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 13)
    DOE notes that wall mounted air cleaners are included, but ceiling 
mounted air cleaners are not included in the definition of conventional 
room air cleaner as defined in section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022. DOE is 
not aware of any test method to test ceiling mounted air cleaners. DOE 
notes that section 3.1.5 of AHAM AC-1-2020 indicates that uniform 
testing practices and statistical examinations of air cleaners designed 
to be mounted on the ceiling have not been conducted. Given the 
potential confusion regarding whether ceiling mounted units are 
considered conventional room air cleaners and the lack of a test method 
for ceiling mounted units, DOE is excluding these air cleaners from the 
definition of conventional room air cleaners in this final rule. 
Additionally, in-duct air cleaners do not meet the definition of 
conventional room air cleaners and are not in the scope of the test 
procedure.
    MIAQ stated its support for the proposed definition of a 
conventional air cleaner as it appears in section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-
2022. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 1) MIAQ and HVI both requested that 
``incidental air cleaning products,'' be excluded from the proposed air 
cleaner test procedure and defined the term as a consumer product that 
would meet the definition of an air cleaner, but which provides an 
additional function, not related to air purification, within the same 
housing, such as a vacuum cleaner, fresh air ventilator, range hood 
(ducted or non-ducted), refrigerator, or desiccant dehumidifier, and 
whose air purification function is incidental to its other functions. 
(MIAQ, No. 26 at pp. 1-2; HVI, No. 32 at p. 1)
    DOE notes that ``incidental air cleaning products'' do not meet the 
definition of an air cleaner as defined in 10 CFR 430.2. Specifically, 
as discussed in the July 2022 Final Determination, the definition of an 
air cleaner states, in part, that it is a product for improving indoor 
air quality, which excludes products that may provide some air cleaning 
as an ancillary function. 87 FR 42297, 42302. Given that the types of 
products described by MIAQ and HVI do not meet the definition of an air 
cleaner as specified in 10 CFR 430.2, DOE has determined that it is 
unnecessary to specify any additional exclusions in the air cleaners 
test procedure in the newly established appendix FF.
    MIAQ requested clarification about whether DOE is referencing the 
definition of consumer room air cleaner in section 2.1 of AHAM AC-7-
2022 Draft, thereby excluding ``duct type'' devices, ``lamps,'' and 
other devices as defined in 10 CFR 430.2. MIAQ stated that based on 
section 2.1.3.3 of AHAM-AC-7-2022 Draft, heat recovery ventilators 
(HRV), energy recovery ventilators (ERV), and supply fans would be 
excluded and that to avoid ambiguity, MIAQ proposed adding the words 
``system in the room'' to the definition provided in section 2.1 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to read as follows: ``Consumer room air cleaner 
means a consumer product for improving indoor air quality that: (1) Is 
an electrically-powered, self-contained system in the room, that has a

[[Page 14019]]

mechanically encased assembly.'' (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 2) MIAQ also 
recommended adding reference to section 2.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for 
the definition of consumer room air cleaner because it lists exclusions 
(e.g., ``duct type,'' ``lamps,'' and the devices defined in 10 CFR 
430.2) that are not explicitly listed in the sections referenced in 
this rulemaking. MIAQ further recommended referencing sections 2.1.3.4 
and 2.1.3.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 for definitions of combined product and 
lamps, respectively. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 4)
    DOE clarifies that it is not referencing the definition of consumer 
room air cleaner as defined in section 2.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022. DOE 
already specifies a definition for air cleaner in 10 CFR 430.2, which 
is similar to the definition of consumer room air cleaner specified in 
AHAM AC-7-2022, but includes a broader scope. As such, for the scope of 
this test procedure rulemaking, the definition of conventional room air 
cleaner is adequate to define the products subject to this test 
procedure. Accordingly, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to 
reference only section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 for the definition of 
conventional room air cleaner. However, because the definition of 
conventional room air cleaner in section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 
includes the term ``consumer room air cleaner,'' which is defined in 
section 2.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022, DOE understands that this could cause 
confusion. Therefore, to avoid any such confusion, DOE is including the 
wording of the definition for conventional room air cleaner at 10 CFR 
430.2 and removing the phrase ``consumer room air cleaner'' and 
replacing it with the term ``air cleaner,'' rather than referencing 
section 2.1.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 within the definition. This definition 
at 10 CFR 430.2 is substantively the same as what DOE proposed in the 
October 2022 NOPR, along with the exclusion of ceiling mounted air 
cleaners as discussed previously. DOE is including the references to 
sections 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.3.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 that were proposed in 
the October 2022 NOPR for the definitions of ``portable'' and ``fixed'' 
in the newly established appendix FF.
    During the NOPR public meeting, Electrolux noted that the 
definition of conventional room air cleaner specifies the removal, 
destruction, or deactivation of particulates and it was not clear if an 
air cleaner that is removing smoke or gases would be included as part 
of this definition. (Electrolux, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at 
p. 14) DOE notes that an air cleaner that can remove, destroy, or 
deactivate particulates, including smoke, would meet the definition of 
a conventional room air cleaner, if it meets the remaining criteria 
specified in the definition.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing its definitions of conventional room air cleaner, portable 
conventional room air cleaner, and fixed conventional room air cleaner.
    Section 2 of AHAM AC-1-2020 indicates that due to the defined 
limits of measurability based on statistical accuracy, for a 95 percent 
confidence limit, the standard is applicable only to air cleaners with 
minimum CADR ratings as follows: 25 cfm for pollen CADR; 10 cfm for 
dust CADR; and 10 cfm for cigarette smoke CADR. Additionally, section 2 
of AHAM AC-1-2020 indicates that the theoretical maximum limits for 
CADR are determined by the maximum number of initial available 
particles, the acceptable minimum number of available particles, an 
average background natural decay rate (from statistical study), the 
size of the test chamber, and the available minimum experiment time. 
Based on these parameters, section 2 of AHAM AC-1-2020 specifies the 
test procedure being applicable only to air cleaners with maximum CADR 
ratings of 600 cfm for dust and cigarette smoke and 450 cfm for pollen.
    The recommended standards presented in the Joint Proposal are 
applicable to conventional room air cleaners with a minimum 
PM2.5 CADR of 10 cfm. (Joint Proposal, No. 16 at p. 9)
    As discussed, DOE's established scope for the test procedure 
pertains to conventional room air cleaners that are portable or wall 
mounted and plug into an electrical outlet. This is consistent with the 
scope of the AHAM AC-7-2022 and AHAM AC-1-2020 industry standards, 
which DOE is referencing for the CADR and power measurement tests, as 
discussed in later sections of this document. Given that DOE proposed 
to reference the AHAM industry standards for the DOE air cleaner test 
procedure, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether 
it should also specify the acceptable CADR range from AHAM AC-1-2020 as 
part of its test procedure scope. Specifically, DOE stated that it 
would consider specifying that the test procedure is applicable for 
conventional room air cleaners with smoke CADR or dust CADR between 10 
to 600 cfm, inclusive. 87 FR 63324, 63328.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether it 
should reference section 2 of AHAM AC-1-2020, which specifies that the 
standard is applicable for air cleaners only within rated CADR ranges 
of 10 to 600 cfm for dust and cigarette smoke. Additionally, DOE 
requested comment on whether this CADR range should be specified for 
PM2.5 CADR instead of for dust CADR and smoke CADR. Id.
    Carrier commented that DOE should specify that the test procedure 
scope include only CADR ranges of 10 to 600 cfm, and that larger air 
purifiers with a CADR greater than 600 cfm should be included only if 
and when AHAM AC-1-2020 is updated to be able to test such air 
cleaners. Carrier recommended that the CADR range should be specified 
for PM2.5 CADR, since it is used for calculating the IEF in 
AHAM AC-7-2022. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 2)
    MIAQ supported DOE's proposal to reference section 2 of AHAM AC-1-
2020 specifying that the standard applies to air cleaners only within 
rated CADR ranges of 10 to 600 cfm for dust and cigarette smoke. MIAQ 
additionally recommended keeping the dust CADR and smoke CADR range 
separate from PM2.5 CADR since the dust CADR and smoke CADR 
are used in a geometric average, and in some cases, a product could 
have a PM2.5 CADR rating within limits, while either smoke 
CADR or dust CADR could fall outside the limit. MIAQ commented that 
based on the hard limit for a theoretical maximum CADR rating based on 
the number of particles, background decay, size of the test chamber, 
and experiment run time, the CADR range of 10 to 600 cfm for dust and 
cigarette smoke should be enforced. (MIAQ, No. 26 at pp. 2-3)
    MIAQ also commented that the pollen CADR limit should be listed, 
and that limits should be set similar to the theoretical maximum CADR 
values for smoke and dust. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 9)
    AHRI commented that it recommends that DOE add a 600 cfm limit to 
PM2.5 CADR in the regulatory language for the test procedure 
and consider covering larger air cleaners with future language. (AHRI, 
No. 33 at p. 1)
    AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to reference section 
2 of AHAM AC-1-2020, specifying that the standard is applicable for air 
cleaners only within rated CADR ranges of 10 to 600 cfm for dust and 
cigarette smoke. AHRI stated that it agrees with DOE that this CADR 
range should be specified for PM2.5 CADR, instead of for 
dust CADR and smoke CADR. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 2)
    Daikin commented that DOE must specify a CADR range that is 
verifiable and subject to regulation. Daikin commented that a minimum 
CADR limit

[[Page 14020]]

is not required in identifying DOE's coverage because every air cleaner 
below a CADR of 600 cfm should be included in the scope of regulation. 
Daikin additionally commented that based on the limitation of the AHAM 
standards, DOE should include a maximum CADR limit of 600 cfm. (Daikin, 
No. 35 at p. 2) Daikin also recommended that DOE develop a standard for 
large air cleaners (i.e., with capacities greater than 600 cfm) prior 
to the next cycle of this regulation. (Daikin, No. 35 at p. 1)
    During the NOPR public meeting, Daikin recommended that the test 
procedure scope should be clarified to include the CADR thresholds, 
which is prescribed based on the allowable limits of the test procedure 
and test room. (Daikin, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 10-11 
18) Daikin also asked if there was a way to accommodate air cleaners 
that have a CADR greater than 600 and suggested the CADR thresholds 
should be based on the PM2.5 CADR metric. (Daikin, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 16-17)
    Carrier agreed with Daikin that there should be some way to 
accommodate larger-capacity air cleaners in the test procedure. 
(Carrier, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 17)
    The CA IOUs commented that the CADR limitation of 10 to 600 cfm for 
both cigarette smoke and dust is due to limitations of the test 
chamber, particulate density, and other aspects of the test standard. 
While it is appropriate to reference this limitation in applicability 
to this test procedure, the CA IOUs disagree that a cfm limitation 
should apply to air cleaners as a whole. The CA IOUs stated they 
understood that AHAM and IEC discussed the challenges associated with 
testing units outside this scope and were working to resolve these 
concerns; therefore, the CA IOUs requested that DOE not delay the 
advancement of this proposed test procedure while test methods were 
developed and refined for very large-capacity units. (CA IOUs, No. 30 
at p. 3)
    The Joint Commenters stated that products that perform beyond the 
maximum CADR values need to be tested in a larger chamber for accurate 
assessment of their CADR. The Joint Commenters commented that the 
technical aspects for defining a repeatable and reproducible test 
method for a larger chamber are currently under evaluation in an AHAM 
task force and an IEC ad hoc working group, noting that once the issues 
are resolved there may be updates to AHAM AC-1. The Joint Commenters 
stated that they continue to support the 600 cfm limit for smoke CADR 
and dust CADR and do not currently recommend extending the test method 
to units with performance greater than 600 cfm for smoke CADR and dust 
CADR. The Joint Commenters clarified that their recommendations are 
restricted to consumer room air cleaners and noted that their comments 
specifically reference the current scope of AHAM AC-1-2020. (Joint 
Commenters, No. 34 at p. 7)
    DOE appreciates the comments regarding the testing of air cleaners 
with a CADR greater than 600 cfm. However, given the theoretical limits 
of the test chamber specified for testing air cleaners, DOE has 
determined that it is appropriate to specify the minimum (10 cfm) and 
maximum (600 cfm) allowable CADR limits as part of the air cleaners 
test procedure scope in newly established appendix FF. The test chamber 
currently specified for testing cannot accommodate units with smoke 
CADR or dust CADR greater than 600 cfm; accordingly, units with either 
CADR greater than 600 cfm are not in the scope of this test procedure.
    Additionally, because PM2.5 CADR is a calculated value, 
determined as the geometric mean of smoke CADR and dust CADR, it would 
not be the appropriate metric for which to define scope limits within 
newly established appendix FF. A maximum CADR limit for a given 
particulate is dependent on the maximum number of initial available 
particles, the acceptable minimum number of available particles, an 
average background natural decay rate (from statistical study), the 
size of the test chamber, and the available minimum experiment time. 
Each of these factors is based on the particles that are used for a 
given test, which are either smoke or dust. Therefore, DOE concludes 
that the scope limits must be defined using smoke CADR and dust CADR, 
rather than PM2.5 CADR. Specifically, DOE is specifying in 
section 1 of newly established appendix FF that the test procedure is 
applicable for conventional room air cleaners with smoke CADR and dust 
CADR between 10 to 600 cfm. DOE is also finalizing its determination 
that it is unnecessary to specify an allowable pollen CADR range in 
addition to the smoke or dust CADR range because pollen CADR is within 
the allowable range for dust and smoke.

C. Industry Standards Incorporated by Reference

1. AHAM AC-1-2020 and AHAM AC-7-2022
    As discussed, AHAM published AHAM AC-1-2020 for measuring the 
performance of portable household electric room air cleaners. AHAM AC-
1-2020 is a voluntary industry-developed test procedure that provides 
test methods to measure the relative reduction of smoke, dust, and 
pollen suspended in the air in a specified test chamber when an air 
cleaner is in operation. The test method is conducted by introducing a 
known initial concentration of a given particulate in the chamber, 
without the air cleaner in operation, to measure its natural decay. 
Next, the particulate is reintroduced in the chamber with the air 
cleaner in operation to measure the particulate decay with the air 
cleaner operating. The difference in the logarithmic rate of decay with 
the air cleaner in operation and without the air cleaner in operation, 
multiplied by the volume of the chamber, provides the CADR value of the 
test unit. AHAM AC-1-2020 additionally specifies methods to measure an 
air cleaner's active mode power consumption when conducting the pollen, 
smoke, or dust performance test in the test chamber, as well as methods 
to measure standby mode power consumption.
    AHAM AC-1-2020 is currently referenced by the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) in the ENERGY STAR Product Specification for 
Room Air Cleaners, Version 2.0, Rev. May 2022 (ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 
Specification).\12\ Further, the ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 Specification is 
referenced by air cleaner standards in Washington, DC and the States of 
New Jersey, Nevada, and Maryland.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Further information on the ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 Specification 
is available online at www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%2020%20Room%20Air%20Cleaners%20Specification%20%28Rev.%20May%202022%29.pdf.
    \13\ Further information on State air cleaner standards and 
timelines is available online from ASAP at appliance-standards.org/product/air-purifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed, since development of the October 2022 NOPR, AHAM's 
air cleaner task force has finalized a new test method, AHAM AC-7-2022, 
that specifies the test methods for measuring air cleaner efficiency. 
The power measurement test methods specified in AHAM AC-7-2022 use the 
existing power measurement test methods specified in AHAM AC-1-2020, 
updated to reflect current air cleaner technologies and 
functionalities. Additionally, AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the methods to 
determine PM2.5 CADR, which is calculated based on the 
geometric average of smoke CADR and dust CADR values; AEC; and IEF 
(expressed in CADR/W), which defines the efficacy (i.e., energy

[[Page 14021]]

efficiency) of an air cleaner. DOE has participated in the meetings of 
the AHAM task force group responsible for developing AHAM AC-7-2022 and 
has provided input on several topics during its development. DOE also 
conducted testing according to AHAM AC-7-2022 and provided input to the 
AHAM task force based on its observations and experience during 
testing.
    AHAM AC-7-2022 additionally references AHAM AC-1-2020 in several 
sections to specify requirements for the test chamber equipment and 
setup, as well as to conduct the in-chamber active mode power 
consumption test. All but one section refer to ``ANSI \14\/AHAM AC-1,'' 
``AHAM AC-1,'' ``AC-1,'' or ``ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2020.'' DOE understands 
each of these references to be denoting the AHAM AC-1-2020 version of 
the standard, since it is included as a normative reference in AHAM AC-
7-2022. In contrast, section 5.7.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 references ``ANSI/
AHAM AC-1-2022,'' specifically by stating that potassium chloride (KCl) 
is allowed as an alternate to cigarette smoke in ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2022. 
(See section III.G.1 of this final rule for DOE's consideration of the 
use of KCl as an alternative to cigarette smoke). DOE notes, however, 
that ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2022 is not published--DOE understands AHAM will be 
revising the standard in 2023--and the text of the AHAM AC-1-2022 
standard was not available publicly for DOE to review at the time of 
the analysis for this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference 
the then-latest draft of AHAM AC-7-2022 into 10 CFR 430.3 and to 
reference the relevant sections of this industry standard in the DOE 
test procedure at proposed new appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 63329. DOE 
also proposed modifications to certain aspects of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, 
as discussed in the relevant sections of the October 2022 NOPR. (Id.)
    Specifically, DOE proposed to reference AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to 
specify the test methods for determining PM2.5 CADR, AEC, 
and IEF. AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft specifies definitions, test conditions, 
and test methods for determining active mode power, standby mode power, 
out of chamber active mode power, and PM2.5 CADR. DOE 
initially determined that the measurement of PM2.5 CADR and 
power consumption as specified in AHAM-AC-7-2022 Draft would produce 
test results that measure the energy efficiency of an air cleaner 
during a representative average use cycle or period of use and would 
not be unduly burdensome to conduct. Id.
    DOE additionally proposed to incorporate by reference AHAM AC-1-
2020 to reference the test methods for determining pollen CADR, smoke 
CADR, and dust CADR and for each instance where AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft 
references AHAM AC-1-2020. Id. at 87 FR 63329-63330.
    DOE additionally proposed to incorporate by reference IEC 62301 Ed. 
2.0, which is referenced in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, for the 
instrumentation requirements and standby mode power measurement. Id. at 
87 FR 63330.
    DOE additionally proposed to incorporate by reference ASTM E741-
11(2017), which is the current version of the standard referenced in 
section 3.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, with regard to determining the 
test chamber air exchange rate. Id.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE stated its intention to update the 
reference to the final published version of AHAM AC-7-2022 in the test 
procedure final rule, should it publish prior to the final rule, unless 
there are substantive changes between the draft and published versions, 
in which case DOE may adopt the substance of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft or 
provide additional opportunity for comment on the changes to the 
industry consensus test procedure. Id.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that if AHAM AC-7-2022 
referenced an updated version of AHAM AC-1-2020 and if the update 
version is both published and substantively the same as AHAM AC-1-2020, 
DOE would consider adopting the published version of AHAM AC-7-2022, 
including the reference to AHAM AC-1-2022. Additionally, DOE considered 
whether it should include reference to the use of KCl as an alternate 
to cigarette smoke, as currently specified in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to adopt the substantive 
provisions of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft with certain modifications. DOE 
requested comment on its proposal to incorporate by reference AHAM AC-
1-2020, which is referenced in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, as well as to 
specify provisions related to the measurement of pollen CADR, smoke 
CADR, and dust CADR. Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference IEC 62301 Ed. 
2.0, which is referenced in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the 
instrumentation and testing provisions for measuring standby mode power 
consumption. DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference ASTM 
E741-11(2017), which is referenced in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for 
determining the test chamber air exchange rate. Id.
    MIAQ commented in support of DOE's proposal to adopt the 
substantive provisions of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft with certain 
modifications. MIAQ also commented in support of DOE's proposal to 
incorporate by reference AHAM AC-1-2020, which is referenced in AHAM 
AC-7-2022 Draft, as well as to specify provisions related to the 
measurement of pollen CADR, smoke CADR, and dust CADR. (MIAQ, No. 26 at 
p. 3)
    Daikin supported DOE's decision to rely on ANSI standards developed 
by an accredited standards development organization and noted that the 
standards referenced by DOE in the October 2022 NOPR are developed by 
industry experts and stakeholders. Furthermore, Daikin stated that the 
AHAM AC-1-2020 standard is widely used by air cleaner manufacturers and 
adopted by EPA for its ENERGY STAR program. (Daikin, No. 35 at p. 2)
    Carrier commented that it supports DOE's proposal in the October 
2022 NOPR to align the air cleaners test procedure with industry 
standards. Carrier supported referencing AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, IEC 
62301 Ed. 2.0, and AHAM AC-1-2020, with some deviation. (Carrier, No. 
31 at p. 1)
    The Joint Commenters noted that their Joint Proposal urged DOE to 
adopt AHAM AC-7-2022 as the test procedure or to use it as the basis 
for the Federal test procedure. (Joint Commenters No. 34, at p. 2) The 
Joint Commenters stated that they believe AHAM AC-7-2022 satisfies 
EPCA's criteria in 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2) of being reasonably designed to 
produce test results that measure energy efficiency of air cleaners 
during a representative average use cycle and are not unduly burdensome 
to conduct. Therefore, the Joint Commenters stated their support for 
DOE's proposed test procedure, which is largely consistent with, 
although not identical to, AHAM AC-7-2022. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at 
p. 2)
    The Joint Commenters noted that DOE proposed to adopt the 
substantive provisions of AHAM AC-7-2022 in its final draft form with 
some modifications. The Joint Commenters commented that they support 
adoption of AHAM AC-7-2022, which had been published at the time of 
their comments, as the DOE test procedure, though they stated that 
minor differences exist in the instrumentation provisions compared to 
the version that DOE referenced in the October 2022 NOPR. The Joint 
Commenters commented that these

[[Page 14022]]

minor differences are known to other stakeholders and should not 
prevent DOE from adopting the final, published version of AHAM AC-7-
2022. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 2)
    The Joint Commenters stated that they support incorporating by 
reference AHAM AC-1-2020 because, though an updated version of AC-1 is 
in process, it will not be completed in time for DOE to meet the 
timelines in the Joint Proposal. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 2)
    AHRI recommended that DOE implement AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft without 
modifications beyond the consideration of break-in conditions, as 
discussed in the relevant section. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 2)
    NEEA stated its support of DOE's proposed test procedure for air 
cleaners, which would adopt AHAM AC-7-2022. NEEA commented that AHAM 
AC-7-2022 includes significant improvements over the test method in 
ENERGY STAR V. 2.0, including introduction of a PM2.5 CADR 
metric, which would allow testing of a wider range of product classes. 
NEEA commented that AHAM AC-7-2022 also specifies a method for 
calculating AEC, which includes assumptions regarding active operation 
and low power mode, detailing how to use AEC to calculate IEF. NEEA 
added that including low power mode represented an improvement over 
AHAM's previous test procedure. NEEA commented that improvements could 
be made as some elements of the AHAM test procedure were still in 
development, but stated such ongoing work should not delay adoption of 
DOE's proposed test procedure; NEEA cited the example of AHAM 
developing details for determining smoke CADR, such as the use of KCl 
to represent cigarette smoke, as one such issue that should not delay 
adoption. (NEEA, No. 28 at pp. 1-2)
    AAFA commented that DOE should consider aspects of the AAFA/Allergy 
Standards Limited asthma & allergy friendly[supreg] Certification 
Program, designed to help people make better choices when buying 
products to remove allergens and improve indoor air quality. (AAFA, No. 
29 at pp. 2-3)
    DOE recognizes, as stated by the Joint Commenters, that AHAM AC-7-
2022 specifies minor updates to the instrumentation provisions compared 
to the AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft that DOE referenced in the October 2022 
NOPR. DOE discussed these updates to the instrumentation provisions in 
the NOPR public meeting and also discusses them in the relevant 
sections of this document. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 26) 
As discussed elsewhere, the updates to the instrumentation provisions 
do not impact test results. Therefore, DOE is adopting AHAM AC-7-2022, 
with some modifications, in this final rule.
    AAFA's certification program, which is also based on a modified 
version of the AHAM test standard, specifically focuses on particulates 
related to asthma and allergens. DOE has determined that the test 
procedure based on AC-7-2022, including the PM2.5 CADR, 
measures the energy efficiency of air cleaners during a representative 
average use cycle and is not unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE 
recognizes the utility of air cleaners offering specific particulate 
removal capabilities and will consider such capabilities when 
determining appropriate energy conservation standards for air cleaners.
    In conclusion, for the reasons discussed here and in the October 
2022 NOPR, DOE is referencing AHAM AC-7-2022, AHAM AC-1-2020, IEC 62301 
Ed. 2.0, and ASTM E741-11(2017) in this final rule, with certain 
modifications, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.
2. Other Industry Standards
    In this final rule establishing an initial test procedure for 
measuring the energy efficiency of air cleaners, DOE is focusing on the 
functionality most broadly implemented in air cleaners on the market in 
the United States; i.e., the removal of particulate matter through 
mechanical filtration means, which may include ionization particulate 
capture as well. Certain microorganisms, depending on their size, also 
may be removed from the air by such devices. In light of the ongoing 
COVID-19 pandemic and other health concerns, DOE recognizes the utility 
to consumers of additional means for reducing concentrations of 
microorganisms in the air, including destruction or deactivation of the 
microorganisms.
    An example of a test method for air cleaners that reduce 
concentrations of airborne microorganisms is AHAM AC-5-2022, which AHAM 
published in March 2022. Under this test method, air cleaners are 
tested in a manner similar to AHAM AC-1-2020, except microorganisms, 
rather than particulates are aerosolized and introduced into the 
chamber. AHAM AC-5-2022 specifies different types of bacteria, 
bacteriophages, and mold spores that could be used for testing. 
Although DOE did not propose provisions in the October 2022 NOPR to 
measure the efficacy of an air cleaner's removal of microorganisms, DOE 
welcomed comment on the impact the type of microorganism selected for 
testing has on the CADR for microbes (m-CADR) value (e.g., Phi-X 174 
vs. MS2). 87 FR 63324, 63331. DOE also welcomed comment on whether 
measurements taken every two minutes for a duration of 10 minutes, as 
specified in section 7.3 of AHAM AC-5-2022, are sufficient to determine 
m-CADR. Id. DOE additionally requested comment on the duration for 
which a sample must be collected during each measurement point. Id. DOE 
also observed from test results that the natural decay curve for 
microorganisms could be increasing during the first 10-15 minutes and 
welcomed feedback on whether this is reasonable. Id.
    The CA IOUs commented that DOE should continue outreach on other 
test standards (e.g., AHAM AC-4 and AC-5), but not at the expense of 
completing this rulemaking within the timeframe recommended in the 
Joint Proposal. The CA IOUs expressed appreciation that DOE asked 
stakeholders for more information regarding microbiological (AHAM AC-5) 
and gaseous (AHAM AC-4) test standards, but the Joint Proposal did not 
propose a metric based on such testing and the CA IOUs believe it to be 
unnecessary at this time. (CA IOUs, No. 30 at p. 3)
    AHRI advised DOE against referencing AHAM AC-5-2022 and stated that 
the appropriate test standards are already in use for determining m-
CADR. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 3)
    The Joint Commenters stated that DOE should not at this time 
prescribe a test for gases or microorganisms because the Joint 
Commenters have not proposed standards based on them. The Joint 
Commenters commented that if DOE has specific questions about AHAM AC-
5, it should request that the AHAM AC-5 task force reconvene to discuss 
technical matters. The Joint Commenters noted that AHAM AC-5-2022 was 
published in March 2022, meaning little test data is available. (Joint 
Commenters, No. 34 at p. 4)
    MIAQ recommended that DOE focus on mechanical filtration of 
particulates as the basis of its energy regulations because including 
microorganisms and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) as part of CADR 
results would add undue testing and expense to the manufacturer for 
products that may not include any means for reducing these constituents 
(i.e., carbon filter for VOCs). MIAQ commented that specific 
constituents should be considered outside the scope of this testing and 
that introducing any regulations or requirements for microorganism 
reduction may add additional EPA regulation work and documentation and 
could classify the

[[Page 14023]]

product as a pesticidal device. MIAQ added that AHAM AC-4 and AHAM AC-5 
could be used as a basis for the evaluation of CADR ratings for these 
specific use cases, but AHAM AC-4 and AHAM AC-5 should be considered 
supplemental rather than required as part of this regulation. (MIAQ, 
No. 26, at pp. 3-4)
    AHRI commented that stakeholders have not been provided sufficient 
information to provide substantive data on the need for testing with 
more than one microorganism. AHRI requested that DOE provide additional 
clarification on the purpose of this proposal and data to support their 
investigation. AHRI commented that the addition of new microorganisms 
is likely to affect CADR ratings and, as a proposed regulated metric, 
this effect should be carefully considered. AHRI commented that if DOE 
is unable to provide data to support this proposal, any further 
recommendations should be reviewed by the consensus body developing 
AHAM AC-5-2022. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 3)
    Daikin commented in support of further investigation and clarity on 
using the AHAM AC-5-2022 standard in relation to this regulation, as it 
believes that different types of microorganisms are expected to affect 
CADR ratings, and stated that it did not have any recommended action. 
Daikin further commented that if DOE intended to stem the misuse of 
incorrect efficacy claims related to certain infectious pathogens based 
on different laboratory pathogens, then Daikin would support further 
investigation and clarity. (Daikin, No. 35 at p. 2)
    DOE is still evaluating the repeatability, reproducibility, and 
representativeness of AHAM AC-4-2022 and AHAM AC-5-2022. Accordingly, 
and consistent with stakeholder comments, DOE is not prescribing a test 
method for testing gaseous contaminants or microorganisms at this time.

D. Definitions

    As discussed, DOE specifies a definition for air cleaners at 10 CFR 
430.2. Additionally, as discussed in section III.B of this document, 
DOE is referencing, but not incorporating by reference, section 2.1.1 
of AHAM AC-7-2022 in 10 CFR 430.2 to specify the definition for 
``conventional room air cleaner'' and reference within this definition 
sections 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.3.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 to define ``portable air 
cleaner'' and ``fixed air cleaner,'' respectively. These definitions 
are relevant to establish the scope of the new appendix FF.
    In addition to these definitions, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE 
proposed to specify certain additional definitions in the proposed new 
appendix FF that would be required to test air cleaners according to 
the new test procedure. 87 FR 63324, 63332.
    DOE proposed to reference sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, 
and 2.6 through 2.8 \15\ of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to specify definitions 
for the following terms in section 2 of the proposed new appendix FF. 
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ DOE notes in the preamble of the October 2022 NOPR it 
stated that it proposed to reference sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1 
through 2.4.2.4, and 2.6 through 2.8 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, but 
the definitions it proposed to reference from the AHAM standard are 
listed in sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, and 2.6 through 
2.9. 87 FR 63324, 63332. Additionally, the proposed CFR language 
contained the reference to definitions from section 2.9 of AHAM AC-
7-2022 Draft. Id. at 63352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Function means a predetermined operation undertaken by the 
air cleaner. Functions may be controlled by an interaction of the user, 
of other technical systems, of the system itself, from measurable 
inputs from the environment and/or time. In AHAM AC-7-2022, functions 
are grouped into four main types: primary functions, secondary 
functions, user oriented secondary functions, and network related 
secondary functions.
     Primary function means an air cleaning function that 
reduces the concentration of one or more types of indoor air 
pollutants.
     Secondary function means a function that enables, 
supplements, or enhances a primary function. For air cleaners, 
secondary functions are other functions which are not directly related 
to air cleaning. Examples may include a vacuum, heating, 
humidification, or additional ambient room lights (e.g., night light).
     User oriented and network function (i.e., control 
functions) may include network connection, Wi-Fi, clocks, radio, remote 
controls, or other programmable functions that may continue to be 
enabled when the primary function is inactive.
     Mode means a state that has no function, one function, or 
a combination of functions present.
     Active mode means a product mode where the energy using 
product is connected to a mains power source and at least one primary 
function is activated.
     Low power mode as per IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 means a product 
mode that falls into one of the following broad mode categories: off 
mode(s), standby mode(s), network mode(s), inactive mode.
     Standby mode means a mode offering one or more of the 
following user-oriented or protective functions which may persist for 
an indefinite time: (a) To facilitate the activation of other modes 
(including activation or deactivation of active mode) by remote switch 
(including remote control), internal sensor, or timer. Informative 
Note: A timer is a continuous clock function (which may or may not be 
associated with a display) that provides regular scheduled tasks (e.g., 
switching) and that operates on a continuous basis. (b) Continuous 
functions, including information or status displays (including clocks) 
or sensor-based functions.
     Inactive mode means a standby mode that facilitates the 
activation of active mode by remote switch (including remote control) 
or internal sensor, or which provides continuous status display.
     Off mode means a mode in which a consumer room air cleaner 
is not providing any active or standby mode function and where the mode 
may persist for an indefinite time, including an indicator that only 
shows the user that the product is in the off position.
     Network mode means any product modes where at least one 
network function is activated (such as reactivation via network command 
or network integrity communication) but where the primary function is 
not active.
     Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR) is the measure of the 
delivery of contaminant free air, within a defined particle size range, 
by an air cleaner, expressed in cubic feet per minute (cfm). CADR is 
the rate of contaminant reduction in the test chamber when the air 
cleaner is turned on, minus the rate of natural decay when the air 
cleaner is not running, multiplied by the volume of the test chamber as 
measured in cubic feet. Note: CADR values are always the measurement of 
an air cleaner performance as a complete system and have no linear 
relationship to the air movement per se or to the characteristics of 
any particle removal methodology.
     Integrated energy factor (IEF) is the energy the air 
cleaner uses when it is in standby mode, as well as its active mode 
energy. This is fully defined as the measured PM2.5 CADR per 
watt.
     PM2.5 means particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers 
([mu]m) as measured by a reference method based on 40 CFR part 50 Annex 
I and designated in accordance with 40 CFR part 53 or by an equivalent 
method designated in accordance with 40 CFR part 53.

[[Page 14024]]

     PM2.5 CADR is from ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2020; Annex 
I. The performance on PM2.5 of an air cleaner is represented 
by a clean air delivery rate (CADR) based on the dust and cigarette 
smoke performance data. The diversity of particle natures and the sizes 
of the dust and smoke pollutants gives a well-balanced representation 
of the ultra-fine and fine particulate matters that define 
PM2.5. PM2.5 CADR is obtained by combining the 
CADR of cigarette smoke particle sizes ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 [mu]m 
with the CADR of dust particles that fall in the range of 0.5 to 2.5 
[mu]m and performing a geometric average calculation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.001

    AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft also includes definitions for other terms that 
DOE did not propose to incorporate into the proposed new appendix FF. 
Generally, these other terms are inconsistent with or not relevant to 
the scope of the DOE test procedure. Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to include definitions for 
the aforementioned terms, via reference to AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. Id. at 
87 FR 63333.
    Carrier expressed support for DOE's proposal to reference sections 
2.2 and 2.3, sections 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, and sections 2.6 through 
2.8 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the defined terms in the proposed new 
appendix FF, with the only additional recommendation to include 
``ceiling mounted'' in the definition for a ``conventional room air 
cleaner.'' (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 3) For the reasons discussed in 
section III.B of this document, DOE is not including ``ceiling 
mounted'' in the definition of conventional room air cleaners.
    AHRI commented that, if no substantive changes are made to the 
definitions between the draft and final standard, AHRI supports DOE's 
proposal to reference the definitions from AHAM AC-7-2022 in the new 
appendix FF. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 4) DOE notes no changes were made to 
the definitions in section 2 between the AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft and the 
published AHAM AC-7-2022.
    DOE notes in the preamble of the October 2022 NOPR it stated that 
it proposed to reference sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, and 
2.6 through 2.8 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, but the definitions it 
proposed to reference from the AHAM standard are listed in sections 
2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, and 2.6 through 2.9, which is the 
definition for PM2.5 CADR. 87 FR 63324, 63332. Additionally, 
the proposed CFR language contained the reference to definitions from 
section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. Id. at 63352. Given that the 
preamble language included the definition and the proposed CFR language 
contained the reference to section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, DOE is 
finalizing its inclusion in newly established appendix FF of the 
definitions for the aforementioned terms via reference to sections 2.2, 
2.3, 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, and 2.6 through 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022.

E. Test Conditions

    Section 3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies test conditions for the 
measurement of active mode and standby mode power consumption and 
includes references to certain sections of AHAM AC-1-2020 as 
appropriate. Specifically, sections 3.1 through 3.6 of AHAM AC-7-2022 
specify requirements for active mode and standby mode electrical 
supply, test chamber ambient temperature, test chamber air exchange 
rate, test chamber particulate matter concentrations, chamber 
equipment, and test unit preparation (including conditioning of the air 
cleaner prior to testing, placement of the air cleaner for testing, and 
network connection setup requirements), respectively.
    DOE proposed in the October 2022 NOPR to reference the test 
condition requirements specified in sections 3.1 through 3.6 of AHAM 
AC-7-2022 in the proposed new appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 63333. The 
following sections summarize each of the requirements specified in AHAM 
AC-7-2022 along with any stakeholder comments received in response to 
this proposal.
1. Electrical Supply
    Section 3.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the electrical supply 
requirements for active mode and standby mode testing. These 
requirements specify that active mode power supply test voltage and 
frequency must be set to the nameplate voltage 1 percent. 
If a range of voltage is provided on the nameplate, then the voltage 
for the country for which the measurement is being determined shall be 
used per Table 1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 (1 percent). Table 1 
specifies 120 volts and 60 hertz for units in North America. For 
standby mode testing, the power supply test voltage and frequency are 
to be set as noted in Table 1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 (1 
percent), which specifies 115 volts and 60 hertz for units in North 
America. DOE notes that these power supply requirements are generally 
consistent with DOE test procedures for other consumer products for 
which standby mode and active mode are tested. Accordingly, in the 
October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference section 3.1 of AHAM AC-7-
2022 Draft for the electrical supply requirements in the proposed new 
appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 63333.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 3.1 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the electrical supply requirements for active 
mode and standby mode power measurement in proposed new appendix FF. 
Id.
    MIAQ recommended aligning the supply voltage for active mode and 
standby mode, as lower supply voltage may cause lower efficiency of 
switch-mode power supplies. MIAQ added that when measuring standby or 
low power modes, such a minor efficiency change may be more significant 
as the power limit thresholds continue to be lowered. (MIAQ, No. 26 at 
p. 5)
    AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to reference section 
3.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the electrical supply requirements for 
active and standby mode power measurement. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 4)
    Regarding the supply voltages specified for active mode and standby 
mode testing, the proposed voltage specifications are consistent with 
the respective industry standards that DOE proposed to incorporate by 
reference (and that are being incorporated by reference in this final 
rule). That is, section 3.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that the active 
mode power supply test voltage must be the nameplate voltage (1 percent) or, if a range of voltages are provided on the 
nameplate, 120 volts (1 percent). Section 3.1 of AHAM AC-7-
2022 additionally requires 115 volts (1 percent) for the 
standby mode power supply test voltage. DOE notes that this requirement 
is also consistent with the test method specified in ENERGY STAR V. 
2.0. DOE is adopting these voltage requirements in this final rule 
given the potential near-term compliance timeline recommended in the 
Joint Proposal and the consequent burden that would be

[[Page 14025]]

associated with re-testing all units that are currently certified to 
ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 within a short period of time if DOE were to require 
the same voltage requirements for both active and standby mode in 
appendix FF. Additionally, as discussed, EPCA requires DOE to consider 
the most current version of IEC 62301 in prescribing or amending test 
procedures that integrate measures of standby mode and off mode energy 
consumption into the overall energy efficiency, energy consumption, or 
other energy descriptor. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) Section 4.3.1 of 
IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 specifies a test voltage of 115 volts (1 
percent) for standby mode power consumption testing in North America in 
the instance where the test voltage is not otherwise specified in an 
external standard, with no consideration of the nameplate voltage 
included. By incorporating by reference in the newly established 
appendix FF the standby mode supply power test voltage requirements 
from AHAM AC-7-2022, which are consistent with those in IEC 62301 Ed. 
2.0, DOE is in part satisfying EPCA's requirement that the test 
procedure account for standby mode and off mode energy consumption.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the electrical supply specifications for the newly 
established appendix FF, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.

2. Ambient Conditions

    Section 3.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the test chamber ambient 
temperature requirements for active mode and standby mode tests. The 
active mode ambient temperature requirement is 70  5 
degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) (21  3 degrees Celsius 
([deg]C)) with a relative humidity of 40  5 percent. The 
standby mode ambient temperature requirement is 70  9 
[deg]F (21  5 [deg]C), with no relative humidity 
requirement specified. DOE notes that the active mode test requirements 
are similar to the ambient conditions specified for certain other 
consumer products that affect room air besides heating or cooling 
(e.g., DOE's ceiling fan test procedure specifies maintaining the room 
temperature at 70  5 [deg]F and the room relative humidity 
at 50  5 percent during testing),\16\ and as such, DOE 
expects that these conditions would also produce representative test 
results for air cleaners. Additionally, section 5.7.2 of AHAM AC-7-
2022, which specifies the supplemental test to measure active mode 
power consumption outside a test chamber, also references section 3.2 
of AHAM AC-7-2022 to specify that the same ambient conditions must be 
maintained when testing outside the chamber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See section 3.3.1(1) of 10 CFR, part 430, subpart B, 
appendix U, ``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy 
Consumption of Ceiling Fans.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE recognizes that standby mode testing is likely to be much less 
sensitive to ambient room temperature or humidity compared to active 
mode testing, such that the wider tolerance on ambient temperature and 
the lack of a humidity requirement for standby mode testing are 
appropriate. DOE understands that test laboratories already have the 
expertise and equipment necessary to maintain these specified ambient 
temperature and relative humidity test conditions--within the specified 
tolerances--when testing air cleaners within the test chamber, as well 
as the expertise and equipment necessary for maintaining temperature 
within the specified tolerance for standby mode. In the October 2022 
NOPR, DOE proposed to reference these ambient temperature and relative 
humidity requirements from AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft in the proposed new 
appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 63333.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 3.2 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the ambient temperature and humidity 
requirements for active mode and standby mode power measurement. Id.
    MIAQ recommended aligning the ambient temperature for both active 
mode and standby mode. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 5)
    As discussed in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE recognizes standby mode 
testing to be much less sensitive to ambient room temperature or 
humidity compared to active mode testing of air cleaners. Additionally, 
the wider tolerance for the ambient conditions for standby mode testing 
would allow such testing to be conducted outside the specialized active 
mode test chamber, which would significantly reduce test burden by 
allowing greater testing throughput in the specialized active mode test 
chamber.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the ambient test condition specifications in new appendix 
FF, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.
3. Test Chamber Air Exchange Rate
    Section 3.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 requires that, per section 4.3 of 
AHAM AC-1-2020, the test chamber air exchange rate must be less than 
0.03 air changes per hour as determined by ASTM E741 or an equivalent 
method. DOE does not have information on typical air changes within a 
representative room, but this condition is necessary to ensure 
consistent test chamber conditions by minimizing the air exchange rate, 
and DOE has tentatively determined that the industry-accepted 
specification for the air exchange rate, as reviewed by the AHAM task 
force, would be appropriate for air cleaner testing. Accordingly, in 
the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to additionally reference section 
4.3 of AHAM AC-1-2020 within the proposed provisions of section 3 of 
the proposed new appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 63333. As discussed, DOE 
also proposed to incorporate by reference ASTM E741-11(2017), the most 
recent version of that industry standard. Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 3.3 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the test chamber air exchange rate 
requirements, including its reference to ASTM E741-11(2017), in the 
proposed new appendix FF. Id.
    AHRI stated its support for DOE's proposal to reference ASTM E741-
11(2017), referenced in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. AHRI commented that the 
test chamber air exchange rate per AHAM AC-1-2020 should be less than 
0.03 air changes per hour (ACH) as determined by ASTM E741-11(2017). 
(AHRI, No. 33 at p. 3)
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the test chamber air exchange rate requirements, as proposed 
in the October 2022 NOPR, in the new appendix FF.
4. Test Chamber Particulate Matter Concentrations
    Section 3.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the acceptable range of 
particle concentrations for the initial test condition for the smoke 
and dust tests, via reference to AHAM AC-1-2020. The acceptable ranges 
in section 3.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 correspond with the ranges provided in 
section 4.4 of AHAM AC-1-2020. DOE recognizes that initial particle 
concentration is a necessary requirement for repeatability and 
reproducibility by ensuring consistent test chamber conditions prior to 
measuring decay rate, and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively 
determined that the industry-accepted specification for the initial 
particle concentrations, as reviewed by the AHAM task force, would be 
appropriate for air cleaner testing. 87 FR 63324, 63333-63334. 
Accordingly, DOE proposed to reference section 3.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 
Draft and additionally reference section 4.4 of

[[Page 14026]]

AHAM AC-1-2020 within the proposed provisions of section 3 of the new 
appendix FF. Id. at 87 FR 63334.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 3.4 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the initial particulate concentrations in the 
test chamber. Id.
    DOE did not receive any comments on this topic. For the reasons 
discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing the 
provisions specifying the initial particulate concentrations in the 
test chamber, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR, for the new 
appendix FF.
5. Test Chamber Construction and Equipment
    Section 3.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 references Annex A of AHAM AC-1-2020 
to specify the test chamber construction and equipment positioning 
during testing. Annex A of AHAM AC-1-2020 provides requirements for 
chamber size, framework, constructions and material for the walls and 
flooring, as well as additional equipment that must be used in the 
chamber for conducting tests. DOE believes these requirements are 
relevant to ensure that testing is conducted in a representative 
chamber and that it is repeatable and reproducible.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference in the proposed 
new appendix FF section 3.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which references 
Annex A of AHAM AC-1-2020 for the details of the test chamber 
construction and equipment. 87 FR 63324, 63334. DOE requested comment 
on its proposal to reference section 3.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which 
references Annex A of AHAM AC-1-2020 to specify the test chamber 
construction and equipment requirements. Id.
    DOE did not receive any comments on this topic. For the reasons 
discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing the test 
chamber construction and equipment specifications in the new appendix 
FF, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.
6. Test Unit Preparation
    Section 3.6 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies three requirements 
regarding test unit preparation: conditioning of the air cleaner prior 
to measurement in section 3.6.1; test unit placement for testing in 
section 3.6.2; and network connectivity requirements in section 3.6.3.
    For the conditioning requirements, section 3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 
specifies that air cleaners must be operated for 48 hours in maximum 
performance mode to break in the motor prior to conducting any active 
mode tests. It further specifies that this break-in must be conducted 
with replacement filters and that after the break-in period is 
completed, all original and as-received filters must be reinstalled, 
and non-replaceable components should be cleaned according to 
manufacturers' instructions prior to performing the active mode test. 
Additionally, section 3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that 
installation of a UV device that is energized during air cleaning 
function and lamp assembly within the air cleaner shall be according to 
manufacturer's instructions and the burn-in time for the UV lamp shall 
also be 48 hours, run concurrently with the break-in period of the 
motor.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
reference section 3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the air cleaner 
conditioning requirements in the proposed new appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 
63334.
    DOE also requested comment on whether the 48-hour burn-in time for 
air cleaners with UV lights is sufficient or if the burn-in time 
duration should be increased. Id.
    AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to reference section 
3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the air cleaner conditioning 
requirements. AHRI commented that it is imperative to specify and 
standardize conditions for break-in because they may affect ratings. 
AHRI recommended including in the testing conditions maintaining a 
relative humidity below 60 percent in noncondensing conditions, 
maintaining temperatures above 32 [deg]F and below 80 [deg]F, and 
maintaining a testing environment that is free of contaminants, 
particulate matter, and chemicals. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 4)
    Daikin commented it agrees to include section 3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-
2022, but that section 3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 is lacking crucial 
details about the break-in procedure. Daikin stated that the standard 
specifies a break-in duration, but it does not specify where to run the 
unit during the break-in period. Daikin commented that it does not 
expect a laboratory to use the test chamber for the break-in procedure. 
Consequently, if the laboratory places a test unit outside the chamber, 
Daikin stated that the unit should be placed in a location with 
acceptable air quality and absent particulate matter and chemicals 
(e.g., isopropyl alcohol (IPA)) that may affect test repeatability. 
Daikin commented that unless DOE can prove that the break-in location 
has no impact on the measured performance ratings, it is good practice 
to standardize break-in conditions and avoid unnecessary confounding 
factors where feasible. Daikin recommended the following broad ambient 
conditions during break-in to ensure repeatability: room temperature to 
be between 32 [deg]F and 80 [deg]F and relative humidity to be less 
than 60-percent, non-condensing conditions, and the break-in room to be 
a clean, ventilated space, absent of chemicals and particulate matter 
that may be found in a test laboratory conducting air quality tests. 
Daikin recommended that DOE provide more detailed and repeatable break-
in room requirements for future versions of the standard. (Daikin, No. 
35 at pp. 2-3)
    DOE notes that the ambient conditions suggested by AHRI would 
require the use of a test chamber for the duration of the break-in 
period, which is 48 hours. This would significantly increase burden 
compared to using the test chamber only for the active mode 
measurement, as proposed. Regarding Daikin's recommended ambient 
conditions for conditioning the air cleaner, DOE appreciates the 
comment and will continue to investigate these issues as part of the 
AHAM task force. At this time, the proposed use of a replacement filter 
during the break-in period is intended to prevent changes in ratings 
caused by using a pre-used filter during the active mode portion of the 
test. DOE also does not have any information to suggest that it is 
necessary to have the same ambient conditions during break-in as during 
the active mode test, and therefore is not adopting condition 
requirements for the break-in period.
    MIAQ stated its support for a 48-hour burn-in time for air cleaners 
with UV light-emitting diode (LED) lights. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 5)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they believe a 48-hour burn-in 
time for air cleaners with UV lights is sufficient because the lamps 
are not being used for smoke or dust removal and the 48-hour burn-in 
time does not add additional burden to the test setup. (Joint 
Commenters, No. 34 at p. 5)
    AHRI commented that because lamps are not used for smoke and dust 
removal, the 48-hour burn-in time is equivalent to the other components 
and does not create additional test burden. AHRI recommended following 
manufacturers' instructions for burn-in time and commented that unless 
otherwise stated by a manufacturer, the 48-hour burn-in time for air 
cleaners is appropriate. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 4)
    Consistent with the comments summarized in the preceding 
paragraphs, DOE agrees that a 48-hour burn in time for units with UV 
lamps,

[[Page 14027]]

as specified in section 3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022, is suitable to ensure 
a representative and repeatable test condition without being unduly 
burdensome because UV lamps are not used for smoke and dust removal and 
this burn in time is consistent with the break-in period required for 
air cleaners generally.
    Carrier commented that in terms of burn-in time for air cleaners 
with UV lights, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 185.1 \17\ and the National Electrical 
Manufacturers Association (NEMA) require a 100-hour burn-in requirement 
for testing UV lights and that, as a result, Carrier suggested that DOE 
adopt a 100-hour burn-in, instead of the 48 hours defined in section 
3.6.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Standard 185.1-2020--Method of Testing UV-C Lights for Use 
in Air-Handling Units or Air Ducts to Inactivate Airborne 
Microorganisms (ANSI Approved). Available at: https://www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae-185-1-2020?product_id=2185612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE notes that the ASHRAE test standard listed by Carrier is 
specifically intended to evaluate UV-C lamps to inactivate airborne 
microorganisms; whereas, the DOE test procedure is not introducing 
microorganisms in the test chamber, and UV-C lamps without a fan for 
air circulation do not meet the definition of an air cleaner and 
therefore are not within the established scope of this the procedure. 
Additionally, a 100-hour UV burn-in period would significantly increase 
burden, and Carrier did not provide any data or information to suggest 
what additional benefit would be gained over the proposed 48-hour burn-
in period.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the air cleaner conditioning requirements, as proposed in 
the October 2022 NOPR, in the new appendix FF.
7. Test Unit Placement for Testing
    Section 3.6.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that the air cleaner must 
be placed in the test chamber in accordance with section 4.6 of AHAM 
AC-1-2020, which states that the air cleaner must be installed per 
manufacturer's instructions in the center of the test chamber, facing 
the test window, positioned with its air discharge as close as possible 
to the test chamber center. Section 4.6 of AHAM AC-1-2020 further 
requires that if the manufacturer's instructions ``do not specify'' 
\18\ and the air cleaner is not a floor model, the air cleaner must be 
placed on the table for testing. AHAM AC-1-2020 does not provide 
further specificity as to how to determine if an air cleaner is a floor 
model, which may potentially cause ambiguity in determining whether a 
particular air cleaner would need to be placed on the table. DOE notes 
that section 5.7 of IEC 63086-1 \19\ requires that if placement of an 
air cleaner is not specified by the manufacturer and the air cleaner's 
height is less than 0.7 meters from the floor, the unit shall be placed 
on a table of 0.7 meters in height. In all other instances, IEC 63086-1 
specifies that the air cleaner shall be placed on the floor of the test 
chamber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ DOE understands the language ``If manufacturer's 
instructions do not specify'' to mean that the manufacturer's 
instructions do not clearly indicate the placement of the air 
cleaner on a floor, table, or another flat surface.
    \19\ IEC 63086-1:2020, ``Household and similar electrical air 
cleaning appliances--Methods for measuring the performance--Part 1: 
General requirements.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference section 3.6.2 
of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft in the proposed new appendix FF. 87 FR 63324, 
63334. DOE also considered including the additional test unit placement 
requirement from IEC 63086-1. Id. at 87 FR 63334-63335. By referencing 
a measurable metric (unit height) to determine the installation 
configuration of the air cleaner in the absence of manufacturer's 
instructions, DOE stated that IEC 63086-1 may provide greater certainty 
regarding how to test certain air cleaner models, which could 
contribute to a more reproducible and representative test measurement. 
Id. In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE considered specifying the height 
limit for placement on the table in the test chamber as 28 inches, 
given that 0.7 meters is approximately 27.6 inches. Id. Additionally, 
DOE considered whether it should include any requirement for air 
cleaners shipped with casters; specifically, whether such air cleaners 
should be tested on the floor regardless of the unit's height. Id.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
reference section 3.6.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which references 
section 4.6 of AHAM AC-1-2020 for the test unit placement instructions, 
in the proposed new appendix FF. Id.
    DOE also requested comment on whether it should consider including 
the requirement from IEC 63086-1 that specifies that if the placement 
of the air cleaner is not specified by the manufacturer and the air 
cleaner's height is less than 28 inches, then the unit must be tested 
on the table. Specifically, DOE requested comment on whether the 
language in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft stating that ``if the air cleaner is 
not a floor model'' is clear to follow, without any ambiguity, or 
whether a quantitative metric such as unit height would be better to 
ensure consistent test setup. Id.
    DOE also requested comment on whether it should include any 
placement instructions for air cleaners shipped with casters. Id.
    Carrier commented that in cases where the manufacturer does not 
specify placement and fails to designate the unit as a floor model, DOE 
should include the requirement from IEC 63086-1 specifying that if the 
placement of the air cleaner is not specified by the manufacturer and 
the air cleaner's height is less than 28 inches, then the unit must be 
tested on the table. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 4)
    MIAQ recommended following the manufacturer's instructions; for 
example, if the air cleaner is called a ``floor model,'' it should be 
tested on the floor, however if it lacks the specification as a ``floor 
model,'' it should be tested on the table. MIAQ also commented that if 
an air cleaner included casters for portability, then the unit should 
be tested on the floor, unless otherwise specified in the 
manufacturer's instructions. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 6)
    AHRI commented that AHAM has published an interpretation of AC-1-
2020 (October 3, 2022) \20\ that specifies test unit placement 
instructions and recommended that DOE reference this publication. 
(AHRI, No. 33 at p. 4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See AHAM's comment during the public meeting. (AHAM, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 24)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Joint Commenters stated that AHAM addressed several of DOE's 
requests for comments on unit placement and section 4.6 of AHAM AC-1-
2020 by adding an interpretation to AHAM AC-1-2022 on October 3, 2022. 
The Joint Commenters commented that questions addressed include (1) 
whether to include additional test unit placement requirements, (2) 
whether to include a requirement for air cleaners shipped with casters, 
and (3) whether to specify placement of the air cleaner if placement is 
not specified by the manufacturer and the air cleaner's height is less 
than 28 inches. The Joint Commenters stated that a published copy of 
AHAM-AC-1-2020 with interpretation was provided to DOE on November 14, 
2022. The Joint Commenters commented that they urge DOE to adopt the 
interpretation as part

[[Page 14028]]

of its incorporation by reference. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 5)
    As noted by the Joint Commenters, AHAM has added an interpretation 
to the AHAM AC-1-2020 standard that includes the unit placement 
specifications from IEC 63086-1, which provides greater clarity on the 
air cleaner placement when no manufacturer instructions are specified. 
The AHAM AC-1-2020 interpretation also notes that units with casters 
should be interpreted as floor models even when manufacturer 
instructions do not specify placement instructions.
    DOE has determined that the updated AHAM-AC-1-2020 standard with 
the included interpretation that specifies the unit placement 
specifications from IEC 63086-1 is consistent with and adequately 
addresses the unit placement concerns discussed in the October 2022 
NOPR. Accordingly, DOE is maintaining its reference to section 3.6.2 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 for unit placement in the new appendix FF, but section 
3.6.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 references AHAM AC-1-2020, which includes the 
additional AHAM Standard Interpretation that specifies the same 
requirements as those specified in IEC 63086-1 and discussed in the 
October 2022 NOPR. For the reasons discussed here and in the October 
2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing the test unit placement instructions by 
referring to the AHAM Standard Interpretation in AHAM AC-1-2020.
8. Network Functionality
    Section 3.6.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies requirements for setting 
up air cleaners with network functionality, including requirements for 
the network connection and for establishing the connection between the 
air cleaner and the network. This section specifies that air cleaners 
must be tested on a Wi-Fi network and that if the unit has additional 
network capabilities (e.g., Bluetooth[supreg]), these capabilities 
shall remain in their default, as-shipped configuration. Additionally, 
section 3.6.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that the network shall 
support the highest and lowest data speeds of the air cleaner's network 
function, and that the live connection must be maintained for the 
duration of the active mode and standby mode tests. AHAM AC-7-2022 also 
specifies that if the air cleaner needs to install any software 
updates, testing must wait until these updates have occurred; 
otherwise, if the unit can operate without updates, the updates may be 
bypassed.
    DOE is aware of at least one air cleaner on the market \21\ that 
cannot be operated by the user, unless it is connected to an active 
network connection. On such a model, control of the air cleaner is 
provided exclusively through a mobile phone application. Accordingly, 
in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference the AHAM AC-7-2022 
Draft network connection requirements in the proposed new appendix FF. 
87 FR 63324, 63335.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See, for example: auraair.io/pages/aura-air-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 3.6.3 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft regarding network connection requirements during 
active mode and standby mode tests. DOE also requested comment on the 
impact on repeatability and reproducibility when testing air cleaners 
with network functionality while connected to a network. Id.
    Additionally, DOE requested comment on whether the software update 
requirements are adequately specified or whether DOE should explicitly 
state that software updates must always be executed prior to running 
the tests. Id.
    MIAQ commented that products with network connectivity should be 
network-connected for active and standby tests. MIAQ added that not 
including an available network connection would not represent actual 
real-world usage, and that network connectivity on a device would be 
the worst-case test scenario regarding power consumption and therefore 
needed to be considered. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 6)
    MIAQ commented that products should always be tested with the 
latest software/firmware updates to ensure the latest bug fixes and 
changes are applied. MIAQ commented that software bugs associated with 
wireless connectivity may cause undue power consumption during the test 
and that updating software to the latest publicly available revision 
may avoid testing pre-loaded firmware that allows the device to consume 
less power. MIAQ stated that, if available, the firmware/software 
version should be recorded as part of the test for trackability. (MIAQ, 
No. 26 at pp. 6-7)
    The CA IOUs recommended that DOE should expressly state that the 
tester must always execute software updates before running the tests. 
The CA IOUs stated they understood that the conducting of these 
software updates was the intent of AHAM AC-7 section 3.6.3.8. (CA IOUs, 
No. 30 at p. 3)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they support DOE's proposal to 
reference section 3.6.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 regarding network connection 
requirements. The Joint Commenters stated that they believe the text of 
section 3.6.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 provides the most consistent, 
representative, and repeatable method for energy measurements. The 
Joint Commenters also stated that the intent of section 3.6.3.8 of AHAM 
AC-7-2022 is for software updates to be conducted prior to running the 
tests, as is industry practice. The Joint Commenters commented that if 
DOE wishes to indicate that the updates are mandatory, the Joint 
Commenters do not oppose that clarification. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 
at p. 6)
    In response to DOE's request for comment on whether the software 
update requirements are adequately specified, AHRI stated it does not 
have specific concerns. However, AHRI added that if there are different 
opinions on the need for when to perform software updates, it 
recommended addressing this issue during a certification rulemaking. 
(AHRI, No. 33 at p. 5)
    In consideration of these comments, DOE has determined that 
installing the most recent software update prior to testing would 
ensure the most consumer-representative test results because consumers 
are most likely to update software if an update is available and, this 
would also ensure repeatable test results. Because section 3.6.3.8 of 
AHAM-AC-7-2022 does not adequately specify that the most up-to-date 
software shall be used, DOE is incorporating in the new appendix FF 
section 3.6.3.8 of AHAM AC-7-2022 with the additional requirement that 
software updates shall be conducted prior to initiating any testing. 
This added specificity will ensure reproducible and representative test 
results for units that can accommodate software updates.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the network connection requirements, as proposed in the 
October 2022 NOPR, in the new appendix FF and additionally clarifying 
that software updates shall be conducted prior to initiating any 
testing.

F. Instrumentation

    Section 4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies requirements for 
instrumentation used for measuring voltage and power by referencing IEC 
62301 Ed. 2.0 and specifies the accuracy required for power-measuring 
equipment.
    Sections 4.1.1 through 4.1.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specify requirements 
for power measurement uncertainty,

[[Page 14029]]

frequency response, and long-term averaging, by referencing 
requirements in sections 4.4.1 through 4.4.3 of IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0. 
Along with these requirements, section 4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies 
the accuracy of instruments used for measuring voltage and power to be 
accurate to within 0.5 percent of the quantity measured. 
Section 4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 also specifies requirements for the 
accuracy of the temperature-measuring device (error no greater than 
 0.6 [deg]C ( 1 [deg]F) over the range being 
measured) and the relative humidity-measuring device (resolution of at 
least 1 percent relative humidity, and an accuracy of at least  3 percent relative humidity over the temperature range of (21 
 3) [deg]C [(70  5) [deg]F]).
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE had referenced section 4.1.5 of AHAM 
AC-7-2022 Draft, which specified that the accuracy of the temperature-
measuring device must have an error no greater than 1 
[deg]F (0.6 [deg]C) over the range being measured (i.e., the allowable 
error was specified primarily in [deg]F compared to the published AHAM 
AC-7-2022, which specifies the allowable error primarily in [deg]C). 
Section 4.1.6 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which DOE referenced in the 
October 2022 NOPR, also specified that the relative humidity-measuring 
device shall have resolution of at least 1 percent relative humidity 
and shall have an accuracy of at least 6 percent relative 
humidity over the temperature range of (24  3) [deg]C [(75 
 5) [deg]F]. 87 FR 63324, 63335.
    DOE understands these instrumentation specifications to be 
appropriate for producing repeatable, reproducible, and representative 
test results for air cleaners, and that test laboratories currently 
have instrumentation that meets these proposed specifications. 
Therefore, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference the 
instrumentation requirements specified in section 4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 
Draft, including the applicable provisions from sections 4.4.1, 4.4.2, 
and 4.4.3 of IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 in the proposed new appendix FF. Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to incorporate by reference 
section 4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft regarding instrumentation 
requirements, including the applicable provisions from relevant 
sections of IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0. DOE requested comment on any changes to 
these requirements between publication of the October 2022 NOPR and 
publication of AHAM AC-7-2022, the reasons for these changes, and the 
impact of these changes on the overall air cleaners test procedure. Id.
    AAF Flanders (AAF) recommended tightening the accuracy of the 
relative humidity measuring device from the 6 percent 
specified in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft because some of the media used in 
filters could be affected by humidity. (AAF, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 25 at p. 23) AAF also commented that the updated humidity 
instrumentation requirements in the published version of AHAM AC-7-2022 
should be incorporated into the DOE test procedure. (Id. at p. 27)
    The Joint Commenters stated that the published version of AHAM AC-
7-2022 includes two editorial changes compared to AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft 
that was referenced in the October 2022 NOPR: (1) the [deg]C 
temperature was added in section 4.1.5; and (2) the relative humidity 
accuracy was improved in section 4.1.6. The Joint Commenters commented 
that these editorial changes clarify the test and will improve 
accuracy. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 6)
    MIAQ stated support for DOE's proposal to reference IEC 62301 Ed. 
2.0 as cited in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the instrumentation and 
testing provisions used to measure standby mode power consumption. 
(MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 3)
    As discussed, the proposed editorial change to the temperature-
measuring device accuracy requirements would not change the allowable 
tolerance, and the tighter tolerance for the relative humidity-
measuring device is achievable. Accordingly, DOE is finalizing the 
instrumentation requirements in this final rule by referencing section 
4 of AHAM AC-7-2022.

G. Active Mode Testing

1. Particulate Used for Testing and CADR Measurements
    AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies calculating IEF using PM2.5 
CADR. Whereas, the ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 Specification specifies its 
metric based on smoke CADR, and the ENERGY STAR Product Specification 
for Room Air Cleaners, Version 1.0 \22\ specified its metric based on 
dust CADR (as did the subsequent Version 1.2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Further information on the ENERGY STAR Product 
Specification for Room Air Cleaners, Version 1.0 Specification is 
available online at www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/specs//private/room_air_cleaners_prog_req.v1_0pdf.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the historic use of both smoke and dust particulates to 
define a metric for air cleaners, DOE proposed in the October 2022 NOPR 
to incorporate by reference section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to 
specify testing with smoke and dust and calculating PM2.5 
CADR. 87 FR 63324, 63337. Additionally, DOE proposed to reference 
sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020 for conducting the smoke CADR and 
dust CADR tests in the proposed new appendix FF. Id.
    Section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the method used to 
calculate PM2.5 CADR, which is based on the measured smoke 
CADR and dust CADR values. Section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 discusses that 
the diversity of particle natures and the sizes of the dust and smoke 
pollutants give a well-balanced representation of the ultra-fine and 
fine particulate matters that define PM2.5. Specifically, 
PM2.5 CADR is obtained by combining the smoke CADR (which 
includes particle sizes ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 [micro]m) with the dust 
CADR (which includes particle sizes ranging from 0.5 to 2.5 [micro]m) 
and performing a geometric average calculation as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.002

    The tests to determine smoke CADR and dust CADR are specified in 
sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020. These sections of AHAM AC-1-2020 
specify the procedure for introducing the smoke and dust particulates, 
conducting the natural decay test, and measuring the decay with the air 
cleaner in operation. However, PM2.5 CADR specifies a 
narrower range of allowable particle sizes for the smoke CADR and dust 
CADR, than the smoke CADR and dust CADR tests in sections 5 and 6, 
respectively, of AHAM AC-1-2020. That is, the allowable particle size 
for smoke particles is 0.1 to 1 [micro]m for the smoke CADR test in 
AHAM AC-1-2020, while it is 0.1 to 0.5 [micro]m for the 
PM2.5 calculation in AHAM AC-7-2022. Similarly, the 
allowable particle size for dust particles is 0.5 to 3 [micro]m for the 
dust CADR test in AHAM AC-1-2020, while it is 0.5 to 2.5 [micro]m for 
the PM2.5 calculation in AHAM AC-7-2022.

[[Page 14030]]

    While the allowable smoke and dust particle size ranges for the 
smoke CADR and dust CADR tests in sections 5 and 6, respectively, of 
AHAM AC-1-2020 are larger (i.e., 0.1 to 1 [micro]m for smoke particles 
and 0.5 to 3 [micro]m for dust particles) than the allowable smoke and 
dust particle size ranges for the calculation of PM2.5 CADR 
(i.e., 0.1 to 0.5 [micro]m for smoke particles and 0.5 to 2.5 [micro]m 
for dust particles), the subset smoke CADR and dust CADR used to 
calculate PM2.5 are nearly identical to the smoke CADR and 
dust CADR calculated according to sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020, 
as shown in the figures included in the Joint Proposal.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The figure appears on page 6 of the Joint Proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, as discussed in section III.C.1 of this document, section 
5.7.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022, states that KCl is allowed as an alternate to 
cigarette smoke per ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2022, which is a standard that has 
not yet published.
    Accordingly, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE also proposed that 
PM2.5 CADR may alternatively be calculated in the proposed 
new appendix FF using the full range of particles used to calculate 
smoke CADR and dust CADR according to sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-
2020, respectively. 87 FR 63324, 63337. DOE added that it may revisit 
allowing the use of both approaches to calculate PM2.5 CADR 
in a future standards rulemaking. Id.
    DOE requested feedback on its proposal to incorporate by reference 
section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to calculate PM2.5 CADR 
based on measurements of smoke CADR and dust CADR.
    DOE also requested comment on its proposal to reference sections 5 
and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020 to specify the test methods for determining 
smoke CADR and dust CADR, respectively. Id.
    DOE also requested comment on whether it should consider specifying 
that KCl is an allowable alternate to cigarette smoke in the 
measurement of smoke CADR, even if AHAM AC-1-2022 is not published by 
the time DOE publishes its final rule. DOE requested data and 
information on the implications of using cigarette smoke and KCl 
interchangeably when performing air cleaner performance tests. DOE 
requested data and information on how a CADR value obtained using KCl 
compares to the CADR value obtained using cigarette smoke. 87 FR 63324, 
63330.
    AHRI commented that PM2.5 CADR is the preferred 
regulated metric. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 6)
    Carrier stated its support for DOE's proposal to incorporate by 
reference section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to calculate 
PM2.5 CADR based on measurements of smoke CADR and dust 
CADR. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 4)
    AHRI commented that AHAM developed the PM2.5 CADR 
calculation based on smoke and dust measurements using geometric 
averaging. AHRI commented that PM2.5 is more meaningful to 
consumers than dust CADR and does not require additional testing. AHRI 
stated that because particulate matter is the primary pollutant of 
concern, PM2.5 CADR is the most appropriate metric. (AHRI, 
No. 33 at p. 6) AHRI commented that PM2.5 has been 
successfully used for decades to represent particles in air filtration 
and testing. AHRI additionally stated that ASHRAE 52.2 \24\ considers 
PM2.5 to be one of the 12 particles used for testing, and 
commented that spectrometric measurements of PM2.5 are 
highly accurate and successful. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Standard 52.2--2017--Method of Testing General Ventilation 
Air-Cleaning Devices for Removal Efficiency by Particle Size (ANSI 
Approved). Available at: https://www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae-52-2-2017?product_id=1942059.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE agrees that the PM2.5 CADR metric is the most 
appropriate metric to use for assessing CADR performance. 
PM2.5 CADR is an established industry metric that can 
provide consumer-relevant and representative results as compared to a 
CADR metric based on a single particulate because the range of particle 
sizes included in PM2.5, also referred to as fine particles, 
pose the greatest risk to health.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ ``Particulate Matter (PM) Pollution.'' EPA. Available at: 
https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Frey commented that DOE was relying on outdated science on high 
efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration. Frey discussed that in 
the early 1990s, research showed that 0.3 [micro]m particles were not 
the most difficult particles to capture, and that HEPA-level filtration 
was much less efficient with smaller particle sizes.\26\ Frey urged DOE 
to take into account real-world filtration statistics that show 
filtration 26 times better than HEPA at particles of 0.3 [micro]m in 
size. Frey stated that when removing dangerous pathogens, the higher 
the efficiency, the better, and that HEPA was not the best standard for 
such a task. (Frey, No. 22 at p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Frey provided two attachments regarding particle 
filtration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE notes that the air cleaners test procedure is intended to test 
conventional room air cleaners regardless of the technology used. That 
is, DOE is not establishing a test procedure only for air cleaners that 
utilize HEPA filters. Additionally, the test does not measure 
performance exclusively for 0.3 [micro]m particles or the removal 
efficacy for 0.3 [micro]m particles. Instead, particles introduced into 
the test chamber range in size from 0.1 [micro]m to 2.5 [micro]m, which 
are much broader in range than 0.3 [micro]m particles.
    The CA IOUs noted that the Joint Proposal proposed to use the dust 
CADR results from AHAM AC-1-2020 for the dust particulate test for 
already-tested products, which would help manufacturers meet the short-
compliance timeline that is specified in the Joint Proposal. The CA 
IOUs stated that retesting products to AHAM AC-7-2022, which specifies 
a narrower range of allowable particle size, for the Tier 1 energy 
efficiency standard that is proposed in the Joint Proposal with a 
compliance deadline of December 31, 2023 would be challenging, and 
DOE's proposal to extend this same testing option to cigarette smoke in 
addition to dust was understandable as the retesting burden is the 
same. However, the CA IOUs commented that DOE should specify this 
requirement only for the Tier 1 energy efficiency standards, which 
would ensure that when the Tier 2 energy efficiency standards take 
effect, all products would be certified using the same test procedure. 
The CA IOUs added that if DOE found limiting the use of AHAM AC-1-2020 
to only Tier 1 too challenging, the CA IOUs were amenable to allowing 
the full range of particulate size for the Tier 2 standards as well. 
(CA IOUs, No. 30 at pp. 3-4)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they agree DOE should permit 
sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020 for smoke CADR and dust CADR to be 
applied in the calculation of PM2.5 CADR for the Tier 1 
standard proposed in the Joint Proposal. The Joint Commenters stated 
that the smoke CADR and dust CADR in sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2022 
are nearly identical to the subset particulate size used to calculate 
the PM2.5 CADR. The Joint Commenters further commented that 
allowing this alternative for Tier 1 will ensure that manufacturers are 
not required to re-test using AHAM AC-1-2020 Annex I \27\ to 
demonstrate compliance with a new standard on such a short timeline and 
can meet the expedited compliance date. Additionally, the Joint 
Commenters stated that they do not object to also

[[Page 14031]]

applying this alternative to the Tier 2 standards in the Joint Proposal 
given that the results are essentially identical. (Joint Commenters, 
No. 34 at p. 6-7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Note that Annex I of AHAM AC-1-2020 specifies the 
calculation of PM2.5 CADR, which is the same as that 
specified in section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AHAM stated during the NOPR public meeting that there is very high 
correlation between PM2.5 CADR calculated using the narrower 
and broader particle size range as the smoke and dust particle count 
tapers off after 0.5 [micro]m. AHAM also stated that the purpose of 
allowing both ranges to be used is to allow manufactures to use 
previously certified data. AHAM noted that the particle size range was 
adjusted in AHAM AC-7-2022 to ensure preciseness of the 
PM2.5 CADR metric. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 
at p. 29)
    MIAQ commented that in section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022, the 
PM2.5 CADR calculation shows the narrower particle size 
range for smoke CADR and dust CADR ratings used to calculate the 
combined PM2.5 CADR. MIAQ suggested updating the equation to 
reflect the particle sizes referenced in sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-
2020 for smoke CADR and dust CADR. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 7)
    Carrier commented that there is insufficient data to demonstrate 
there is no impact from using the larger particle size range for the 
smoke CADR and dust CADR as defined in sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-
2020 compared to the smaller particle size range for the 
PM2.5 calculation in AHAM AC-7-2022. Therefore, Carrier 
stated it does not agree with DOE's proposal to allow the wider range 
to be used as an alternate means, and requests that DOE only allow the 
particle size range as defined in AHAM AC-7-2022. (Carrier, No. 31 at 
p. 4)
    As stated in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that 
PM2.5 CADR may alternatively be calculated using the full 
range of particles used to calculate smoke CADR and dust CADR according 
to sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020, respectively. 87 FR 63324, 
63337. Given the results of the two approaches are similar, DOE noted 
explicitly that this was an alternate calculation that stakeholders may 
(emphasis added) choose to use, but noted it may revisit allowing the 
use of both approaches to calculate PM2.5 CADR in a future 
standards rulemaking. Id. DOE maintains this position in this final 
rule and is not specifying a mandatory requirement at this time to 
calculate PM2.5 CADR using the full range of particulate 
size as specified in sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020. That is, DOE 
is referencing section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 for the calculation of 
PM2.5 CADR and additionally specifying the alternate 
calculation using the full range of particulate sizes that may 
optionally be used to determine PM2.5 CADR. DOE will 
consider the applicable required use of either PM2.5 CADR 
approach in a future standards rulemaking.
    Regarding DOE's request for comment on using KCl as an alternative 
to cigarette smoke, MIAQ noted that AHAM expressed concerns with 
current methodology that would specify KCl as an allowable alternate to 
cigarette smoke in the measurement of smoke CADR and asked DOE to 
reference AHAM's comments and ensure alignment. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 3)
    Daikin recommended that DOE specify using KCl instead of cigarette 
smoke to conduct the smoke CADR test. Daikin stated that using KCl 
would increase repeatability of the test due to the uniformity of the 
aerosolized matter and increase reproducibility because laboratories 
are better equipped to control KCl test particles. According to Daikin, 
unlike cigarette smoke, it is easier to clean test chambers after a 
test using KCl, and KCl does not introduce harmful residues and 
carcinogens. Daikin commented that test conditions for KCl testing 
could be different than those for smoke tests. Daikin recommended that 
DOE test, evaluate, and determine specific test conditions for KCl with 
the help of test laboratories. (Daikin No. 35 at p. 2) During the NOPR 
public meeting, Daikin requested more information about the test 
conduct and room concentration for using KCl as an alternative to 
cigarette smoke. (Daikin, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 19-
20)
    The CA IOUs expressed support for adding a reference to KCl as an 
alternative to cigarette smoke, noting that although AHAM AC-1-2020 did 
not sufficiently define the full specification for KCl, it will be 
included in the to-be-published AHAM AC-1-2022. The CA IOUs recommended 
that for expediency, DOE should forgo specifying KCl as an alternative 
to cigarette smoke until the final version of AHAM AC-1-2022 is 
published with sufficient details regarding the use of KCl. (CA IOUs, 
No. 30 at p. 3)
    Carrier stated its support for DOE's proposal to specify that KCl 
serve as an allowable alternate to cigarette smoke in the measurement 
of smoke CADR, even if AHAM AC-1-2022 Draft is not published before the 
final rule. Carrier offered the opinion that KCl will become the most 
widely used method for determining the PM2.5 CADR, but that 
an understanding of the impact to CADR of cigarette smoke verses KCl 
will be necessary to properly establish an energy conversation 
standard. Carrier noted that it currently does not have data for the 
purposes of correlation. (Carrier, No. 31 at pp. 3-4)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they support the concept of 
adding KCl as an alternate to smoke, as specified in a draft of AHAM 
AC-7-2022. However, the Joint Commenters further stated that there is 
not yet sufficient testing knowledge to specify KCl as an alternative. 
The Joint Commenters stated that while AHAM plans to complete the 
required testing, it will not be completed in time for DOE to include 
KCl as an alternative in the final test procedure while adhering to the 
timeline in the Joint Proposal. The Joint Commenters recommended that 
DOE forgo including KCl as an alternative until AHAM AC-1 has been 
updated to include the relevant specifications. The Joint Commenters 
stated that they hope DOE will consider amending the test procedure 
after AHAM AC-1 has been updated. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 5) 
During the public meeting, AHAM noted that they are in the process of 
updating AHAM AC-1-2020 and it will clearly specify what is need for 
KCl to represent cigarette smoke, including how the aerosolizer should 
be set up, the particle distribution and concertation requirements, and 
any additional specifications that may be required. AHAM noted that the 
standard will likely come out after DOE's test procedure final rule. 
(AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 21)
    AHRI recommended that DOE implement AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft without 
modifications to the standard beyond the consideration of break-in 
conditions. AHRI commented that it prefers the PM2.5 CADR 
metric utilizing KCl over the smoke and dust CADR as the regulated 
metric because the necessary technology is already available and that 
utilizing PM2.5 CADR would simplify the testing process. 
AHRI stated that KCl is safer, easier to control, cleaner, and less 
expensive due to the lack of cleaning fees incurred. AHRI recommended 
that DOE consult with the appropriate standards committees and testing 
laboratories to determine the appropriate testing conditions for air 
cleaner performance tests. AHRI also commented that it prefers 
PM2.5 CADR using KCl as the regulated metric compared to 
smoke or dust CADR. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 2)
    DOE recognizes the benefits of using KCl over cigarette smoke such 
as safer and cleaner test chamber conditions; however, given that the 
specific parameters to use KCl as an alternate to cigarette smoke are 
still under

[[Page 14032]]

development and DOE lacks data that correlates PM2.5 CADR 
using KCl and cigarette smoke, DOE is not specifying the use of KCl as 
an alternative for cigarette smoke at this time. For the reasons 
discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing 
referencing sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020 to specify the test 
methods for determining smoke CADR and dust CADR respectively, as 
proposed in the October 2022 NOPR. DOE is also finalizing referencing 
section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 to calculate PM2.5 CADR and 
including an exception for alternately calculating PM2.5 
CADR using the smoke CADR and dust CADR as calculated according to 
sections 5 and 6 of AHAM AC-1-2020.
2. Performance Mode for Testing
    Section 5.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that all products shall be 
tested with the air cleaner set to the highest flow rate setting, also 
known as maximum performance mode. Additionally, section 5.3 of AHAM 
AC-7-2022 specifies that for products that have air cleaning 
functionality beyond mechanical filtration (i.e., ionization, UV, etc.) 
the test unit shall be configured such that these features are enabled 
and set to the maximum level during active mode testing. Section 5.6 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 additionally specifies that even though a product may 
have automatic mode, it shall be tested in its maximum performance mode 
and settings.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference section 5.3 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft regarding test unit setup requirements for testing 
in maximum performance mode. 87 FR 63324, 63338.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 5.3 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to test units in maximum performance mode. Id.
    Electrolux requested clarification regarding air cleaners with a 
turbo mode and whether turbo mode would be used during testing, or if 
testing would cover only the highest fan speed set manually. (Public 
Webinar Transcript, Electrolux, No. 25 at pp. 33-34)
    DOE notes that section 5.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that the 
maximum performance mode flow rate setting is the highest fan speed 
setting as identified in the manufacturer's instructions that would 
allow the product to operate indefinitely. Therefore, a turbo mode 
setting that has the highest flow rate for a certain period of time 
before transitioning to a lower flow rate without user input would not 
be considered for the maximum performance mode setting.
    MIAQ commented that testing units in maximum performance mode 
represented the best solution for testing a worst-case power 
consumption scenario. MIAQ additionally stated that AHAM was working on 
a test plan for automatic mode. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 8)
    The Joint Commenters commented that that there is no universally 
accepted way to test the speeds of all air cleaners. The Joint 
Commenters recommended that all air cleaners be tested at the maximum 
performance setting, which includes the highest continuous speed for 
the air cleaner, allowing consumers to make an informed selection based 
on the air cleaner's highest performance level. The Joint Commenters 
stated that the AHAM standards committee is working to develop a 
procedure for assessing automatic mode. However, the Joint Commenters 
stated that they believe it is worthwhile for DOE to proceed with the 
currently available test methods for now in order to achieve national 
standards and energy savings immediately. The Joint Commenters stated 
that they would not support DOE waiting to implement standards until an 
automatic-mode test is developed. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 8)
    Daikin stated that it does not fully agree with the use of maximum 
power mode as the only power consumption or performance and efficacy 
test for air cleaners. Daikin commented that it is Daikin's 
understanding that DOE and AHAM are working together on identifying a 
test procedure for automatic mode operation. Daikin commented that it 
supports such an investigation and requested DOE to consider a lower 
operation mode (or a range of operation modes and contaminant loading) 
to ascertain a more realistic in-field air cleaner performance. Daikin 
commented that a maximum operation mode is not representative of field 
operations and such a metric can mislead consumers in making important 
decisions on buying air cleaners. (Daikin, No. 35 at p. 3)
    Daikin commented that the October 2022 NOPR stated an intention to 
adopt the maximum performance mode test because there is no current 
consensus on the automatic mode test, but that the majority of air 
cleaners operate at medium speed or in automatic mode. Daikin added 
that if the intent of the regulation is to regulate the energy 
consumption of these devices and provide certified ratings in DOE's 
database leading to comparisons of CADR for different unit's maximum 
performance mode might not be appropriate and DOE might benefit from 
developing consensus around automatic mode testing. (Daikin, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 34-35) Daikin also commented that the 
IEF metric is not representative of actual energy consumption because 
the unit is not expected to run at the maximum performance level at all 
times. (Daikin, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 41-42) Daikin 
also asked if a sound rating will be measured during the maximum 
performance mode test. (Daikin, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 
31)
    Carrier asked if DOE had considered testing air cleaners at minimum 
or medium air flow to understand the operation in the system at these 
settings. Carrier commented that, in practice, many air cleaners are 
not operated at maximum air flow for noise or other reasons and they 
are operated at lower flow rates, saving energy at the same time. 
(Carrier, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 36)
    AHRI commented that it would be ideal if the metric considered 
multiple modes of operation or the identity of the tested mode so that 
consumers have an accurate picture of product operation. (AHRI, No. 33 
at p. 6)
    NEEA recommended that DOE pursue future enhancements to the test 
procedure to account for performance in automatic mode, but that 
implementation of the test procedure should proceed to avoid delays in 
implementation of the energy conservation standard and so that near-
term energy savings can be achieved. (NEEA, No. 28 at p. 2)
    As discussed in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE determined that the 
requirement to perform testing at the maximum performance level 
provides the best balance among repeatability, reproducibility, and 
representativeness of test results at this time. 87 FR, 63324, 63338.
    DOE notes that industry-accepted test methods for other modes, such 
as automatic mode or low speed mode, do not currently exist. DOE is 
participating in the AHAM task force that is developing a test method 
for testing air cleaners with automatic mode. Currently, DOE is not 
aware of a test procedure for air cleaners in automatic mode that 
measures energy efficiency during a representative average use cycle 
and that is not unduly burdensome to conduct. In the absence of such a 
test method for automatic mode, DOE maintains its determination that 
testing at the maximum performance level provides the best balance 
among repeatability, reproducibility, and representativeness of test 
results at this time. DOE additionally notes that it is not

[[Page 14033]]

including testing provisions for a sound rating because sound is not a 
direct performance measure of air cleaning (unlike smoke, dust, or 
pollen).
    DOE is finalizing the requirement to test units in maximum 
performance mode, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR. Accordingly, 
DOE is referencing sections 5.3 through 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 for 
conducting the active mode test.
3. Secondary Functions
    Section 5.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the configuration for 
secondary functions, which are unrelated to air cleaning (i.e., 
humidifier, ambient light, etc.). As these functions do not contribute 
to the air cleaning capabilities of the unit, they are switched off or 
disconnected for the duration of the test. If it is not possible to 
switch off or disconnect such functions, AHAM AC-7-2022 states that 
these functions shall be set to their lowest power-consuming mode that 
is selectable when running the air cleaner at its maximum performance 
mode or highest fan speed. For customized control displays, AHAM AC-7-
2022 specifies that the test unit shall be configured to its default or 
as-shipped control setting intensity level, unless the panel lights are 
adjustable in intensity and are shipped in the off mode, in which case 
the control panel is run in the least-intensity mode that would keep it 
on for the test. In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference 
this requirement for the configuration of secondary functions. 87 FR 
63324, 63338.
    Section 5.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the configuration of 
control functions during active mode testing. Control functions include 
any programmable functions that may continue to be enabled when the 
primary function is inactive (i.e., clocks, Wi-Fi, remote controls, 
etc.). AHAM AC-7-2022 states that control functions are intended to be 
on and connected to any communication network during active mode 
testing.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference this 
requirement to specify that control functions shall be in on mode and 
connected to any communication network during active mode testing as 
specified in section 5.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. Id. DOE requested 
comment on its proposal to reference sections 5.4 and 5.5 of AHAM AC-7-
2022 Draft to specify the configuration of secondary functions and 
control functions during active mode testing. Id.
    AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to reference 
sections 5.4 and 5.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 and advised DOE that it is 
acceptable to power off secondary functions if doing so has no impact 
on particle removal. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 6)
    As specified in section 5.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022, DOE agrees that it 
is acceptable to power off secondary functions, if it is possible to 
turn them off and doing so would not have an impact on air cleaning, 
because it allows determining the power consumption associated with air 
cleaning only, without the inclusion of any other functions (e.g., a 
night light). Further, DOE does not have, nor did interested parties 
provide, information on consumer usage of secondary functions in air 
cleaners. Therefore, for the reasons discussed here and in the October 
2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing in the newly established appendix FF the 
configuration of secondary functions and control functions during 
active mode testing, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.
4. Power Measurement Procedure
    Section 5.7 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the methods for measuring 
active mode power. These methods include measuring the power 
consumption when operating the test unit within the test chamber at the 
same time as the smoke CADR and dust CADR tests or by measuring the 
power consumption during a supplemental power test outside a test 
chamber.
    More specifically, section 5.7.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies that 
the power consumption measurement can be conducted simultaneously with 
the smoke CADR or dust CADR test from section 5.2.5 or 6.2.5 of AHAM 
AC-1-2020, respectively. Section 5.7.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies an 
alternative method for measuring active mode power consumption, 
referred to as the ``supplemental'' test. This test can be used to 
determine the active mode power consumption outside the test chamber 
used for smoke CADR and dust CADR testing. The supplemental power test 
specifies the same unit configuration and records power over a period 
of 15 minutes at no greater than one second intervals, averaging the 
power consumption over 13 minutes starting after the initial two 
minutes. AHAM AC-7-2022 additionally specifies that if the test unit 
has pollutant indicators and they do not light up when no pollutant is 
present in the air, but light up when detecting pollutants, then the 
test unit cannot be tested outside the chamber to measure active mode 
power consumption.
    Finally, sections 5.7.3 and 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specify the 
equations to determine the average active mode power consumption and 
the annual active mode energy use, respectively.
    As presented in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE performed testing at a 
third-party laboratory to investigate the similarity in power 
measurement between a test conducted simultaneously with the CADR 
measurement and a supplemental test performed outside a test chamber. 
87 FR 63324, 63338-63339.

              Table III.1--Difference in Power Consumption Between Smoke Test and Supplemental Test
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Supplemental test power
               Unit No.                  Smoke test power (W)             (W)               Percent difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................                     44.2                     43.9                     -0.7
2....................................                     51.5                     54.0                     +4.9
3....................................                     55.0                     55.6                     +1.1
4....................................                     24.6                     25.4                     +3.3
5....................................                     18.8                     18.9                     +0.5
6....................................                     42.6                     42.6                       +0
7....................................                      5.9                      5.8                     -1.7
8....................................                     38.2                     37.4                     -2.1
9....................................                     37.9                     38.3                     +1.1
10...................................                     58.1                     57.8                     -0.5
11...................................                     84.8                     81.7                     -3.7
                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Average Difference...............  .......................  .......................                     +0.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 14034]]

    As indicated in Table III.1, the percent difference between power 
consumption measured during the smoke CADR test and the supplemental 
out-of-chamber test ranged from -3.7 percent to +4.9 percent, with an 
average of +0.2 percent. Based on these data, in the October 2022 NOPR, 
DOE tentatively determined that the power consumption of the out-of-
chamber supplemental power test is closely comparable to the in-chamber 
smoke, and likely dust, CADR tests because measured power using the 
maximum performance mode is not significantly impacted by whether a 
particle is present. 87 FR 63324, 63339. Accordingly, DOE proposed to 
reference sections 5.7.1 through 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to 
measure active mode power either in the test chamber (section 5.7.1) at 
the same time as the smoke or dust CADR test or outside the chamber 
(section 5.7.2) as a supplemental power test and to calculate average 
power (section 5.7.3) and annual active mode energy use (section 
5.7.4). Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference sections 5.7.1 
through 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which specify methods for 
measuring active mode power at the same time as the smoke or dust CADR 
test when the test unit is operating within the chamber and measuring 
the power consumption during a supplemental power test outside a test 
chamber, respectively. Id.
    The CA IOUs stated their agreement with DOE's proposal to reference 
sections 5.7.1 through 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 because it would allow 
power measurement at the same time as CADR in certain settings. (CA 
IOUs, No. 30 at p. 4)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they agree with DOE's proposal 
to reference sections 5.7.1 through 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022. The Joint 
Commenters stated that investigative testing by AHAM showed a -0.2 
percent difference between the two methods, which they noted aligns 
with DOE's testing. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 7)
    Daikin commented on the continued system performance over a 
system's lifetime. Daikin asked if there were any considerations around 
sustained CADR performance over a system's lifetime. (Daikin, Public 
Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 49) DOE's test procedure is intended 
to measure the performance of a new product. DOE does not have any data 
or information to suggest how CADR may change over the lifetime of an 
air cleaner, if at all.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the methods for measuring active power at the same time as 
the smoke CADR or dust CADR test when the test unit is operating within 
the chamber or measuring the power consumption during a supplemental 
power test outside a test chamber, respectively, as proposed in the 
October 2022 NOPR.
5. Pollen CADR
    To enable consistent and meaningful energy representations of 
metrics most desirable to consumers, DOE proposed in the October 2022 
NOPR to include an additional test to determine pollen CADR. 87 FR 
63324, 63339. Similar to dust CADR and smoke CADR, pollen CADR provides 
a measurement of the air cleaner's performance to remove pollen from 
indoor air. Pollen CADR typically increases with increasing air cleaner 
energy use, and therefore DOE believes this is an appropriate metric to 
measure. Further, according to the AAFA, more than 50 million people in 
the United States experience various types of allergies each year, and 
allergies are the sixth leading cause of chronic illness in the United 
States.\28\ Further, pollen is one of the most common environmental 
allergens to trigger an allergic reaction. Accordingly, many air 
cleaners are marketed as providing pollen removal. DOE notes that the 
ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 Specification requires reporting of pollen CADR. DOE 
stated in the October 2022 NOPR that it is important that any 
representation related to an air cleaner's pollen CADR performance be 
made based on testing conducted in a repeatable and representative 
manner. Accordingly, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to include 
the pollen CADR measurement test specified in section 7 of AHAM AC-1-
2020. 87 FR 63324, 63339.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America. Allergy Facts and 
Figures. www.aafa.org/allergy-facts/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 7 of AHAM AC-1-2020 specifies the test procedure for 
determining paper mulberry pollen CADR. The method for measuring pollen 
CADR is the same as dust CADR and smoke CADR; however, the test 
duration is only 10 minutes compared to 20 minutes for the smoke test 
and dust test. The reduced test duration is specified because pollen 
decays faster than both dust and smoke and thus only 10 minutes is 
necessary to determine pollen CADR. All other test conditions remain 
the same including the test chamber, use of a recirculation and ceiling 
fan, and test equipment.
    DOE stated in the October 2022 NOPR that because this test is 
currently specified in the ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 Specification, DOE 
expects it would minimally increase test burden compared to the tests 
required for smoke CADR and dust CADR. Id. at 87 FR 63339.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
reference section 7 of AHAM AC-1-2020 for the pollen CADR measurement 
test. Id. at 87 FR 63339-63340. DOE also requested comment and data on 
the relationship between the pollen CADR measurement and the energy use 
of the air cleaner. Id. at 87 FR 63340.
    DOE further requested comment on whether it should specify 
measurement of active mode power consumption when conducting the pollen 
CADR measurement test. DOE also requested comment on whether it should 
consider specifying a pollen CADR/W metric and whether such a metric 
should be based on active mode power consumption or include energy 
consumption in both active mode and standby mode. Id.
    MIAQ commented that there would be little additional burden to 
measure active power consumption when conducting the pollen CADR 
measurement test and such a measurement may provide additional energy 
consumption metrics for a higher power consumption rate as compared to 
smoke, dust, or PM2.5. (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 9)
    MIAQ commented that the CADR/W metric for pollen was not necessary 
but could be considered in a manner similar to the AHAM metrics for 
smoke CADR, dust CADR, PM2.5 CADR, and pollen CADR and the 
corresponding energy consumption metrics in CADR/W for each of the 
different pollutants, which would allow for a range of pollutants to be 
included. On the issue of including energy consumption for active mode 
or both active mode and standby mode, MIAQ commented that if this 
metric were used, it should follow the same methodology as that used 
for smoke, dust, or PM2.5. (Id.)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they do not believe a pollen 
CADR/W metric is necessary because they did not propose a standard 
based on pollen. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 3)
    AHAM asked if manufacturers must use the DOE test procedure if they 
make a pollen CADR claim. AHAM also asked if there will be a reporting 
requirement for pollen CADR or standards for pollen CADR in a future 
rulemaking. AHAM further asked what DOE is basing its authority upon to 
include a

[[Page 14035]]

measurement that is not related to the PM2.5 CADR metric. 
(AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 43-44)
    The CA IOUs commented that a power measurement during a pollen CADR 
test is unnecessary because the Joint Proposal did not propose a 
pollen-based standard. (CA IOUs, No. 30 at p. 3)
    Carrier commented that the inclusion of pollen CADR is unnecessary 
and that manufacturers who would like to publish a value for pollen 
CADR can do so using the industry standard. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 2) 
Carrier also commented that DOE should not specify a pollen CADR/W 
metric because this could create confusion in the market, as consumers 
may unknowingly attempt to compare an IEF based on pollen CADR to an 
IEF based on PM2.5 CADR. Carrier commented that specifying a 
pollen CADR/W metric could increase design burden if the minimum IEF 
requirement for pollen CADR and PM2.5 CADR are not 
correlated properly. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 5)
    AHRI stated that pollen CADR creates additional test burden and 
should not be added to the DOE test procedure requirement. AHRI further 
commented that DOE has the authority to regulate a single metric for a 
function and the smoke CADR currently used in energy calculations 
renders use of pollen CADR redundant. AHRI also commented that 
employing the same metric with different conditions may be confusing to 
end users and stated that testing must be representative of average use 
cycles or periods of use and cannot add burden without value. (AHRI, 
No. 33 at pp. 6-7)
    First, in response to AHAM's comment on whether DOE may consider 
standards for pollen CADR in a future rulemaking, DOE notes, based on a 
review of products available on the market, that most manufacturers 
provide pollen CADR information on marketing materials. And, as 
discussed previously, similar to dust and smoke CADR, increasing pollen 
CADR typically requires increasing air cleaner energy use. As a result, 
DOE may consider pollen CADR in a future standards rulemaking. To that 
end, DOE is establishing a test procedure for pollen CADR in this final 
rule. (See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A) (requiring that DOE prescribe a test 
procedure prior to establishing an amended or new standard).)
    DOE understands that if a pollen CADR/W metric is specified for a 
unit that also has the IEF listed in terms of CADR/W, it could cause 
some confusion in the marketplace. Accordingly, DOE is adopting the 
test to determine pollen CADR as specified in section 7 of AHAM AC-1-
2020 but is not adopting a pollen CADR/W metric. DOE notes that 
manufacturers would be required to use the DOE test procedure if they 
make pollen CADR representations, including in marketing materials.
    Regarding regulated metrics for air cleaners, DOE is not adopting 
reporting requirements or standards for any measured metrics in this 
test procedure final rule. DOE is establishing relevant capacity 
metrics and energy efficiency metrics for air cleaners in this test 
procedure and will consider the appropriate regulated metrics and 
subsequent reporting requirements as part of separate energy 
conservation standards or certification rulemakings.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the pollen CADR measurement test, as proposed in the October 
2022 NOPR.
6. Consumer Use Hours
    Section 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies the calculation for 
Eactive, which is used to convert the power consumption 
measurement to an energy consumption value. To calculate 
Eactive, AHAM AC-7-2022 estimates that an air cleaner spends 
5,840 annual hours in active mode, which is equivalent to 16 hours per 
day.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to align with the estimated 
active mode annual hours specified in AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft 
(corresponding to 16 hours per day) and consistent with the ENERGY STAR 
V. 2.0 specification. 87 FR 63340.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 5.7.4 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which specifies the calculation of active mode 
energy consumption using an estimated 5,840 hours per year in active 
mode. Id.
    MIAQ expressed support for DOE's proposal to reference section 
5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft; however, MIAQ noted that as technology 
progresses, the estimated 5,840 hours per year in active mode would no 
longer be acceptable (e.g., on-demand usage). (MIAQ, No. 26 at p. 9)
    DOE understands that the annual active mode hours may need to be 
periodically updated to keep up with technology trends. EPCA requires 
that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate test procedures for 
each type of covered product 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)) DOE welcomes stakeholders to submit any relevant data 
and information regarding consumer usage hours in different modes of 
operation.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the calculation of active mode energy consumption using an 
estimated 5,840 hours per year in active mode, as proposed in the 
October 2022 NOPR.

H. Standby Mode Testing

    Section 6 of AHAM AC-7-2022 defines the setup and procedures to 
measure air cleaner standby mode power consumption. In the October 2022 
NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference all subsections of 
section 6 of AHAM AC-7-2022, which establish conditions of measurement, 
preparation of the air cleaner model for testing, test procedure, test 
results, and the annual combined low power mode energy consumption 
calculations. 87 FR 63324, 63340.
    Section 6.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022 references section 5.3 of IEC 62301 
Ed. 2.0 for the procedure to measure standby mode power. Sections 6.4.1 
and 6.4.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 define measurements for inactive mode 
power, PIA, and off mode power, POM, respectively. DOE proposed to 
reference section 6.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft. Id. at 87 FR 63340-
63341.
    Section 6.5 of AHAM AC-7-2022 defines an annual combined low power 
mode energy consumption calculation based on PIA and POM as follows:

ETLP = {(PIA x SIA) + (POM x SOM){time}  x K

Where:

PIA = air cleaner inactive mode power, in W, for air cleaners 
capable of operating in inactive mode; otherwise, PIA = 0,
POM = air cleaner off mode power, in W, for air cleaners capable of 
operating in off mode; otherwise, POM = 0,
SIA = annual hours in inactive mode and defined as SLP if no off 
mode is possible, [SLP/2] if both inactive mode and off mode are 
possible, and 0 if no inactive mode is possible,
SOM = annual hours in off mode and defined as SLP if no inactive 
mode is possible, [SLP/2] if both inactive mode and off mode are 
possible, and 0 if no off mode is possible,
K = 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for Wh to kWh,
SLP = 2,920 air cleaner inactive mode annual hours.

    Consistent with the active mode energy consumption calculation, 
AHAM AC-7-2022 specifies 2,920 annual hours in standby mode, which is

[[Page 14036]]

equivalent to 8 hours per day and is consistent with the estimated 
standby mode hours specified in the ENERGY STAR V. 2.0 Specification. 
Accordingly, in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference these 
requirements for standby mode. Id.
    DOE requested feedback on its proposal to reference section 6 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft to determine annual combined low power mode energy 
consumption. Id.
    During the Public Meeting, an unidentified stakeholder asked if the 
secondary functions would be disabled during standby mode testing. 
(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at p. 39) As discussed in section 
III.D of this document, DOE is incorporating by reference from section 
2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 definitions for ``secondary function'' and 
``standby mode.'' Because the definition of standby mode excludes 
secondary functions (i.e., functions that enable, supplement, or 
enhance a primary function and which are not directly related to air 
cleaning, including a vacuum, heating, humidification, or additional 
ambient room lights (e.g., night light)), any such secondary functions 
would be disabled during standby mode testing.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the annual combined low power mode energy consumption 
determination, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.

I. Integrated Energy Factor Metric

    As discussed, EPCA requires that DOE's test procedures for all 
covered products integrate measures of standby mode and off mode energy 
consumption into the overall energy efficiency, energy consumption, or 
other energy descriptor, unless such integration is technically 
infeasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A))
    DOE's analysis shows that it is technically feasible to integrate 
active mode and standby mode energy consumption into an overall 
performance metric for air cleaners. Specifically, active mode and 
standby mode power consumption can be combined into the AEC metric 
using the respective estimated annual usage hours. Further, to express 
air cleaner performance as a function of its power use, DOE's analysis 
shows that an integrated metric, such as IEF, is technically feasible. 
This approach is similar to other DOE test procedures, such as room air 
conditioners (see section 5.2.2 of 10 CFR 430, appendix F) and 
dehumidifiers (see section 5.4 of 10 CFR 430, appendix X1), which 
specify a metric that is expressed as space conditioning function 
provided per unit power.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by reference 
section 7 of AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft, which provides a calculation to 
determine AEC and IEF for air cleaners as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.003

Where:

CADR = PM2.5 Clean air delivery rate from the combined 
smoke and dust test [cfm].
Eactive = air cleaner active mode test energy consumption 
(in kWh per year).
ETLP = low power mode annual energy consumption 
(expressed in kWh per year). 87 FR 63324, 63341-63342.

    DOE requested comment on its proposal to reference section 7 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 Draft for the AEC and IEF calculations. Id. at 87 FR 
63342.
    DOE did not receive any comments regarding the proposed methodology 
for determining AEC and IEF. AAF commented that the report that would 
be generated from the test procedure should include a statement 
indicating that measured CADR is only for the highest air flow setting 
for the device, and that it may not reflect performance at lower air 
velocities. (AAF, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 25 at pp. 31-32)
    DOE is not adopting any reporting requirements as part of this 
final rule. Reporting requirements will be addressed in a future 
certification rulemaking. For the reasons discussed here and in the 
October 2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing the AEC and IEF calculations, as 
proposed in the October 2022 NOPR.

J. Effective Room Size

    DOE is aware that air cleaner manufacturers typically include 
several representations in marketing materials for their air cleaner 
models (e.g., smoke CADR, dust CADR, pollen CADR, CADR/W, room size, 
etc.). DOE has observed that room size is represented in different ways 
among various models and different values of suitable room sizes may be 
specified even for the same model. As an illustrative example, DOE 
identified a model that is marketed for a large room up to 912 square 
feet, when completing one air change per hour and taking up to 60 
minutes to clean air, while the same air cleaner is also represented as 
being suitable for a room size of 190 square feet with 4.8 air changes 
per hour and taking about 12.5 minutes to clean air. Further, this unit 
is rated in the AHAM Verifide \29\ program as being applicable for a 
room size of 190 square feet. It is unlikely that the acceptable room 
size for an air cleaner of a given capacity can be increased 
proportionally, potentially to infinity, in such a manner, without 
having an impact on the cleaning performance of the air cleaner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ AHAM Verifide. ahamverifide.org/directory-of-air-cleaners/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Room size would strongly impact the capacity of the air cleaner 
that would be required to clean the air in the desired room. For 
instance, if the air cleaner is too small compared to the size of the 
room it is being used in, it will be ineffective, thus providing low 
efficiency. Conversely, if an air cleaner is too big for the room that 
it is operated in, it will clean the air very quickly and still 
continue operating, leading to increased energy use. Therefore, it is 
important that an air cleaner be selected such that its capacity 
(expressed in terms of its CADR) is appropriate for the size of the 
room that it is intended to be used in. Additionally, for any air 
cleaner, the represented values of CADR and IEF are inherently a 
function of the room size that the unit is expected to

[[Page 14037]]

operate in (i.e., the represented CADR value is inherently a function 
of the test chamber size, number of air exchanges provided, and the 
initial concentration of the contaminant). Accordingly, DOE considers 
room size to be an important metric that must be represented accurately 
and consistently to provide meaningful information to consumers.
    Section 8.6 and Annex E of AHAM AC-1-2020 specify a calculation for 
the effective room size based on standard construction criteria for 
rooms and a history of the natural decay rate of small particles as 
determined for cigarette smoke. Specifically, the room size calculation 
is based on the ability of the air cleaner to reduce the concentration 
of particles, expressed in CADR, in a room at steady state to a new 
steady-state concentration that is 80 percent less than the original 
when the air cleaner is operating. The calculation includes additional 
assumptions such as a mixing factor equal to 1.0, an air exchange rate 
of 1 per hour, a cigarette smoke particle natural decay equal to the 
average background natural decay (from statistical study), a ceiling 
height of 8 feet, and a cigarette smoke particle generation or influx 
rate such that a cigarette smoke particle concentration of 1 is 
maintained at the initial steady state. Based on its estimations, AHAM 
AC-1-2020 specifies that the effective room size, in square feet, that 
can be serviced by an air cleaner is 1.55 times the smoke CADR value of 
the air cleaner.
    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to include this calculation 
as a represented value for room size. 87 FR 63324, 63342. Specifically, 
DOE proposed to include in 10 CFR 429.67 that the effective room size 
be calculated as the product of 1.55 and the basic model's represented 
value of smoke CADR. DOE further proposed that this represented value 
of effective room size, in square feet, be rounded to the nearest whole 
number. Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposal to include a calculation from 
AHAM AC-1-2020 for the effective room size that can be serviced by an 
air cleaner. DOE requested comment on whether it is appropriate to use 
smoke CADR as the metric to calculate effective room size or if it 
should be based on PM2.5 CADR instead, in which case, DOE 
requested comment on whether multiplying PM2.5 CADR by 1.55 
to determine effective room size in square feet is appropriate or if a 
different constant would need to be used instead. Id.
    The Joint Commenters commented that they recommend communicating 
room size to consumers via a uniform test method, AHAM AC-1-2020 and 
urged DOE and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to coordinate. The 
Joint Commenters suggested that the recommended room size appear on the 
EnergyGuide label. The Joint Commenters stated that regardless of 
whether DOE or FTC specifies the test procedure, the relevant agency 
must use the test method specified in AHAM AC-1-2020, which calculates 
the recommended room size in square feet based on the removal of at 
least 80 percent of smoke particles in a steady-state room environment 
(assuming the room experiences incoming pollutants at the rate of one 
air change per hour) and with complete mixing in the room. (Joint 
Commenters, No. 34 at p. 3)
    The Joint Commenters commented that DOE and FTC should not consider 
using a PM2.5 CADR or other CADR value in place of the smoke 
CADR value used in the AHAM test method because the PM2.5 
CADR is not measured directly. The Joint Commenters stated that AHAM 
AC-1-2020 uses a specific engineering tobacco smoke to generate the 
smoke CADR, which has particles that are 100 to 1000 times smaller than 
the width of a human hair. The Joint Commenters commented that even if 
a consumer does not smoke, engineering tobacco smoke is a surrogate for 
many of the fine particles that may be found in a home. The Joint 
Commenters noted that the relationship between cleaning rate in CADR 
and room size to clean to the 80-percent level has been verified by 
scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology and 
recognized as reasonable by the FTC. The Joint Commenters stated that 
they strongly urge DOE and/or the FTC to use smoke CADR to determine 
the recommended room size. (Joint Commenters, No. 34 at p. 4)
    The CA IOUs expressed a concern at the different methodologies used 
to derive and promote recommended room sizes. The CA IOUs also 
suggested that the FTC's EnergyGuide label should list the room size as 
determined by AHAM AC-1-2020 because it is an appropriate and accepted 
methodology. The CA IOUs commented that DOE should coordinate with the 
FTC on its open rulemaking relating to the EnergyGuide label for air 
cleaners. The CA IOUs commented that room size is often the first 
prominent feature on an air cleaner product listing and a guiding 
metric for consumers to identify the most appropriate product, but that 
the top three consumer report-rated air cleaners listed on the 
Amazon.com website use different methodologies or have inconsistent 
recommendations for room size measurements. The CA IOUs further stated 
that for consumers to make an informed decision, a single 
recommendation including the proper context was critical for this 
product. (CA IOUs, No. 30 at pp. 2-3)
    Carrier commented that an effective room size should be a 
represented value and suggested that the room-size calculation should 
be based on PM2.5 CADR, since this is used in the IEF 
calculation. Carrier stated a belief that multiplying the 
PM2.5 CADR by 1.55 should yield consistent results with the 
AHAM AC-1-2020 calculation. (Carrier, No. 31 at p. 5)
    Daikin recommended that DOE should focus on PM2.5 as its 
primary pollutant of concern, especially in displaying regulated 
performance ratings. Consequently, Daikin commented that the room size 
metric should be based on PM2.5 CADR. (Daikin, No. 35 at p. 
3)
    Dyson stated that AHAM AC-1-2020 currently precludes a reasonable 
one-size fits all room size calculation in a mandatory regulatory 
context. Dyson commented that DOE should refrain from including room 
size coverage in the scope of the air cleaner test procedure at this 
time. Dyson cited several reasons: (1) manufacturers currently offer 
nuanced estimates of room size coverage customized for different spaces 
to help consumers make shopping decisions. Collapsing room-size 
coverage claims to a single basis would prevent consumers from using 
the comparison, especially in large, commercial spaces (e.g., offices, 
schools); (2) AHAM AC-1-2020 uses a recirculation fan during the test 
that may not be present in real-world spaces, yet the result from this 
test is used to extrapolate room coverage onto larger volumes than the 
test chamber with the result that machines with poor lateral whole-room 
air circulation receive an artificial ``boost''; (3) available data 
have not shown how AHAM AC-1-2020 room coverage translates to 
purification of real spaces, or how consistent that is across different 
rooms and product designs. The increase in measured CADR in actual 
larger chambers may not scale by the same factor for differently 
designed units; (4) the measured CADR of an air cleaner per AHAM AC-1-
2020 was intrinsically linked to the test chamber physical volume, 
meaning the result was not ``air cleaned per minute,'' but rather 
``active decay minus natural decay multiplied by the volume of the test 
chamber'' or ``air cleaned per minute in that room, with the 
recirculation fan''; and (5) the lack of test provisions for air 
cleaners with automatic, sensor-response modes makes DOE's room 
coverage proposal

[[Page 14038]]

overly simplistic, as automatic modes and sensors are common in today's 
air cleaner marketplace. Dyson noted an air cleaner with automatic mode 
solves this concern, but this distinction is absent with the proposed 
AHAM AC-1-2020 test method, which only specifies the machine to be run 
constantly in the highest fan speed operating mode (Dyson, No. 27 at 
pp. 1-2)
    DOE recognizes that manufacturers may want to provide nuanced 
estimates of room size coverage for different usage scenarios. DOE also 
recognizes that the use of a recirculation fan during testing may not 
be present in all real-world spaces, but the recirculation fan is 
necessary during testing to maintain a homogenous environment within 
the test chamber to enable repeatable and reproducible results. DOE 
also notes that while automatic mode and sensors are common in today's 
air cleaners, the test procedure adopted in this document measures the 
performance of air cleaners in maximum performance mode without the use 
of any sensors and the measured room size metric is based on the 
conditions in which the air cleaner is tested (i.e., maximum 
performance mode). Additionally, the PM2.5 CADR and IEF 
measurements are representative only for a given set of conditions 
(e.g., test chamber size, initial particulate concentration, etc.). 
Accordingly, it is necessary that the effective room size specification 
is representative of the other rated parameters, such as 
PM2.5 CADR, AEC, and IEF.
    Additionally, while DOE had requested comment on whether it should 
consider specifying the effective room size calculation in terms of 
PM2.5 CADR, as opposed to smoke CADR, which is used to 
calculate effective room size in AHAM AC-1-2020, DOE has determined 
that using smoke CADR is appropriate because smoke CADR is determined 
directly through testing, whereas PM2.5 CADR is a calculated 
value. The effective room size calculation specified in AHAM AC-1-2020 
is also provided specifically for smoke CADR, and it is possible that 
some assumptions would need to be changed if the effective room size 
were to be calculated using a different metric.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the representation of the effective room size, as proposed 
in the October 2022 NOPR. Further, DOE intends to coordinate with FTC 
regarding labeling requirements for air cleaners during the ongoing 
rulemaking (see 87 FR 64399).

K. Sampling Plan

    In the October 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed the following sampling plan 
and rounding requirements applicable to any representations of energy 
consumption or energy efficiency of air cleaners. 87 FR 63324, 63342. 
The sampling requirements would be included in the proposed 10 CFR 
429.67. Specifically, DOE proposed that the general sampling 
requirements of 10 CFR 429.11 for selecting units to be tested be 
applicable to air cleaners. Id. In addition, DOE proposed that for each 
air cleaner basic model, a sufficient sample size must be randomly 
selected to ensure that a representative value of energy consumption 
for a basic model is greater than or equal to the higher of the mean of 
the sample or upper 95 percent confidence limit (UCL) of the true mean 
divided by 1.10. For IEF or other measure of energy consumption where a 
higher value is preferable to the consumer, the representative value 
shall be less than or equal to the lower of the mean of the sample or 
the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean divided by 
0.90. Id. The mean, UCL, and LCL are calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.004

where:

x is the sample mean;
n is the number of units in the test sample;
xi is the i\th\ sample;
s is the sample standard deviation; and
t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95 percent one-tailed 
confidence interval with n-1 degrees of freedom.

    This proposed sampling plan for air cleaners is consistent with 
sampling plans already established for portable air conditioners,\30\ 
dehumidifiers,\31\ and other similar products that are portable and/or 
provide space conditioning functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 10 CFR 429.62.
    \31\ 10 CFR 429.36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also proposed that all calculations be performed with the 
unrounded measured values, and that representations of pollen CADR, 
smoke CADR, dust CADR, and PM2.5 CADR values of a basic 
model be calculated as the mean of the CADR for each tested unit of the 
basic model, rounded to the nearest whole number. Id. at 87 FR 63343. 
DOE further proposed that AEC be rounded to the nearest 0.1 kWh/year 
and the IEF be rounded to the nearest 0.1 CADR/W. As noted previously, 
DOE proposed that the effective room size be rounded to the nearest 
whole number. DOE proposed that these rounding instructions would be 
included in the proposed sampling plan for air cleaners. Id.
    DOE did not propose any certification or reporting requirements for 
air cleaners in the October 2022 NOPR. DOE would propose certification 
requirements through a separate rulemaking in the future, as needed.
    DOE requested comment on the proposed sampling plan and rounding 
requirements for smoke CADR, dust CADR, PM2.5 CADR, AEC, and 
IEF. Id.
    AHRI recommended the expedited adoption of PM2.5 CADR 
and suggested that DOE define the test procedure around a single 
PM2.5 CADR test as opposed to a calculated rating. AHRI also 
advised DOE to ensure that data is meaningful to end users regardless 
of the results and the consumers should be able to understand the 
rating system and make informed decisions based on the information 
provided. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 7) AHRI recommended that DOE use 
PM2.5 CADR given that DOE is limited to one metric per 
product. AHRI commented that PM2.5 CADR should be 
prioritized over other CADR including smoke, dust, AEC, and IEF as it 
can be considered more representative than the other more specific 
particulates. AHRI stated that using PM2.5 CADR would reduce 
overall test burden because it allows for testing more units while 
requiring that fewer tests be run, thereby lowering testing costs. AHRI 
commented that air quality considerations necessitate that the metric 
be standardized. AHRI commented that DOE should not prohibit 
manufacturers from making claims where needed for specific particles, 
but recommended against DOE regulating them. (AHRI, No. 33 at p. 8)
    DOE's statutory authority does not limit the number of parameters 
that are required to be reported as part of the certification and 
compliance requirements. That is, interim variables that are used for 
calculating the final metric, such as smoke CADR and dust CADR, may be 
reported. DOE is not establishing certification or reporting

[[Page 14039]]

requirements for air cleaners in this final rule, but may consider 
proposals to establish certification requirements and reporting for air 
cleaners under a separate rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment 
certification.
    The CA IOUs recommended that DOE align the rounding for AEC with 
CADR and round to the nearest whole number instead of 0.1 kWh per year. 
The CA IOUs stated that DOE's proposal to round CADR values to the 
nearest whole number for reporting would be consistent with AHAM AC-1-
2020. (CA IOUs, No. 30 at p. 4)
    The Joint Commenters commented that they recommend DOE specify 
rounding AEC to the nearest whole number to be consistent with AHAM AC-
1-2020's rounding of CADR and room size to whole numbers. (Joint 
Commenters, No. 34 at p. 4)
    The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) requested 
information on the proposed rounding of CADR to the nearest whole 
number when the precision of the method is to 10 cfm. NIST 
asked for clarification on whether rounding would be to the nearest 10 
cfm. (Public Webinar Transcript, NIST, No. 25 at p. 48)
    In consideration of stakeholder comments, DOE has determined that 
it is more appropriate to round AEC to the nearest whole number, as 
determined from the accuracy of the test measurement instrumentation. 
Accordingly, DOE has updated the rounding requirements for AEC to be 
rounded to the nearest whole number. Additionally, DOE is maintaining 
rounding CADR to the nearest whole number, which is also consistent 
with the rounding requirements specified in AHAM AC-1-2020.
    Additionally, while DOE proposed in the October 2022 NOPR that the 
sampling requirements would be included in the proposed 10 CFR 429.67, 
DOE is finalizing the sampling requirements in 10 CFR 429.68 because 10 
CFR 429.67 presents certification requirements for certain commercial 
air conditioning and heating equipment. Relatedly, DOE is also updating 
paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) in 10 CFR 429.11, which lists the general 
sampling requirements for selecting units to be tested to change the 
referenced sections from 10 CFR 429.14 through 10 CFR 429.65 to 10 CFR 
429.14 through 10 CFR 429.68.
    For the reasons discussed here and in the October 2022 NOPR, DOE is 
finalizing the sampling plan, as proposed in the October 2022 NOPR, 
while updating the rounding requirements for AEC to be rounded to the 
nearest whole number.
    As discussed previously, manufacturers will not be required to test 
according to the DOE test procedure until compliance is required with 
any future applicable standards for air cleaners that are established.

L. Test Procedure Costs

    EPCA requires that test procedures proposed by DOE not be unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) DOE references industry 
standards AHAM AC-7-2022, AHAM AC-1-2020, and IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 to 
measure pollen CADR, smoke CADR, dust CADR, and active mode and standby 
mode power consumption. DOE also uses these measured values to 
calculate PM2.5 CADR, AEC, and IEF as specified in AHAM AC-
7-2022 and effective room size as specified in AHAM AC-1-2020. The 
following paragraphs discuss DOE's evaluation of estimated costs 
associated with this proposal.
    Based on quotes from third-party laboratories, in the October 2022 
NOPR, DOE estimated average testing costs to be approximately $3,000 to 
test one unit according to AHAM AC-1-2020 at such a laboratory. 87 FR 
63324, 63343. These costs would include the tests to determine pollen 
CADR, smoke CADR, dust CADR, active mode power, and standby mode power. 
DOE typically requires at least two units to be tested for each basic 
model. Therefore, DOE estimated that manufacturers would incur testing 
costs of approximately $6,000 per basic model (because of the minimum 
sample size of two units, as specified in 10 CFR 429.11(b)). Id.
    DOE requested comment on its initial determination of the costs for 
testing according to the proposed new air cleaner test procedure. DOE 
also requested comment on the potential impact to manufacturers from 
the proposed new air cleaner test procedure. Id.
    Carrier commented that DOE's estimated average testing cost is low. 
Carrier commented that its recent experience has been $2,500 per 
aerosol, which would amount to $7,500 per unit or $15,000 per basic 
model. (Carrier, No. 31 at pp. 5-6)
    As discussed, DOE's estimates of $3,000 per test unit and $6,000 
per basic model were based on DOE's recent experience performing 
testing of air cleaners at qualified third-party laboratories. DOE 
recognizes that these costs may not be reflective of the costs incurred 
by all manufacturers who use third-party test laboratories. 
Accordingly, DOE has revised its estimate from the October 2022 
analysis and determines that the cost required to conduct the air 
cleaner test procedure established by this final rule could range from 
$3,000 to $7,500 per unit and $6,000 to $15,000 per basic model.

M. Effective and Compliance Dates

    The effective date for the adopted test procedure will be 30 days 
after publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. As 
previously stated, there are currently no energy conservation standards 
for air cleaners. Beginning on the compliance date of any energy 
conservation standards for air cleaners, any representations with 
respect to the energy use or efficiency of these products, including 
those made for certification purposes, must be made in accordance with 
the test procedure established in this final rule.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 
as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ``Improving Regulation 
and Regulatory Review, 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011), requires agencies, 
to the extent permitted by law, to (1) propose or adopt a regulation 
only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs 
(recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); 
(2) tailor regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, 
among other things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of 
cumulative regulations; (3) select, in choosing among alternative 
regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits 
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, 
and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity); (4) to the 
extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than specifying 
the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities must 
adopt; and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage the 
desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or providing 
information upon which choices can be made by the public. DOE 
emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its guidance, the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has emphasized that such

[[Page 14040]]

techniques may include identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes. For the reasons stated in the preamble, this final 
regulatory action is consistent with these principles.
    Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit 
``significant regulatory actions'' to OIRA for review. OIRA has 
determined that this final regulatory action does not constitute a 
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. 
Accordingly, this action was not submitted to OIRA for review under 
E.O. 12866.

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: www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE reviewed this final rule under the 
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and 
policies published on February 19, 2003.
    On October 18, 2022, DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NOPR) for the test procedure (October 2022 NOPR) presenting DOE's 
proposals to establish a test procedure for air cleaners. 87 FR 63324. 
As part of the October 2022 NOPR, DOE conducted its initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis (IRFA). The following sections outline DOE's 
determination that this final rule does not have a ``significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,'' and that 
the preparation of a FRFA is not warranted.
    DOE did not receive any written comments that specifically 
addressed the impacts on small businesses or that were provided 
directly in response to the IRFA request for comment.
    DOE used the SBA's small business size standards to determine 
whether any small entities would be subject to the requirements of the 
rule. The size standards are listed by North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) code as well as by industry description 
and are available at www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards. 
Manufacturing air cleaners is classified under NAICS 335210, ``Small 
Electrical Appliance Manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 1,500 
employees or fewer for an entity to be considered as a small business 
for this category. DOE used available public information to identify 
potential small manufacturers. DOE accessed the AHAM's database of 
Certified Room Air Cleaners,\32\ ENERGY STAR's data set of Certified 
Air Purifiers (Cleaners),\33\ California Air Resources Board's (CARB) 
CARB-Certified Air Cleaning Devices,\34\ and retailer websites to 
create a list of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that 
manufacture the products covered by this final rule. Once DOE created a 
list of OEMs, DOE used market research tools to determine whether any 
met the SBA's definition of a small entity--based on the total number 
of employees for each company including parent, subsidiary, and sister 
entities--and gather annual revenue estimates. Between the October 2022 
NOPR and the test procedure final rule publication, DOE conducted 
additional research to identify manufacturers and to review the scope 
of manufacturer product offerings. Due to the identification of 
additional manufacturers and updates in scope of test procedure 
coverage, the manufacturer counts have been updated since the October 
2022 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. Certified Room 
Air Cleaners. Available at www.ahamdir.com/room-air-cleaners/ (Last 
accessed January 24, 2022).
    \33\ Energy Star. ENERGY STAR Certified Air Purifiers 
(Cleaners). Available at www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/certified-room-air-cleaners/results (Last accessed May 31, 2022).
    \34\ The California Air Resources Board. ``List of CARB-
Certified Air Cleaning Devices.'' ww2.arb.ca.gov/list-carb-certified-air-cleaning-devices (Last accessed January 1, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on DOE's analysis, DOE identified 43 companies that are OEMs 
of air cleaners covered by this test procedure. DOE screened out 
companies that do not meet the small entity definition and, 
additionally, screened out companies that are largely or entirely 
foreign owned and operated. Of the 43 companies, four were identified 
as small, domestic businesses.
    In this final rule, DOE establishes a new test procedure for air 
cleaners at appendix FF to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B ``Uniform Test 
Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Air Cleaners.'' DOE 
notes that manufacturers will not be required to test according to the 
DOE test procedure until a future energy conservation standard for air 
cleaners is established and compliance is required.
    Based on quotes from third-party laboratories, in the October 2022 
NOPR, DOE estimated average testing costs to be approximately $3,000 to 
test one unit according to AHAM AC-1-2020 at such a laboratory. 87 FR 
63324, 63343. These costs would include the tests to determine pollen 
CADR, smoke CADR, dust CADR, active mode power, and standby mode power. 
DOE typically requires at least two units to be tested for each basic 
model. Therefore, DOE estimated that manufacturers would incur testing 
costs of approximately $6,000 per basic model (because of the minimum 
sample size of two units, as specified in 10 CFR 429.11(b)). Id. As 
discussed in section III.L, DOE has considered comments from one 
manufacturer suggesting that these costs could be as high as $7,500 per 
unit and $15,000 per basic model. DOE has considered these potentially 
higher costs as a more conservative estimate in its analysis.
    For the four small, domestic OEMs, DOE estimated the cost to rate 
their basic models and compared those costs to annual revenues. Using 
DOE's initial estimates from the October 2022 NOPR, DOE found that 
testing costs would be less than one percent of their revenue over the 
typical five-year period between the publication date and compliance 
date of a future energy conservation standard for a newly covered 
product. This conclusion applies to three out of the four identified 
small OEMs even when considering the potentially higher cost of $15,000 
per basic model. For one of the identified OEMs, the more conservative 
cost estimate of $15,000 per basic model would correspond to around 2.3 
percent of the company's conversion period revenue, as discussed in the 
following paragraphs.
    For the first company identified, it will incur a testing cost of 
$60,000 for its 10 models as a result of amendments to the test 
procedure (or, as a more conservative estimate, $150,000). This company 
has an annual revenue of $272.64 million. A testing cost of $60,000 is 
approximately 0.004 percent of the company's conversion period revenue 
(or, as a more conservative estimate, a testing cost of $150,000 is 
approximately 0.01 percent of the company's conversion period revenue).
    For the second company identified, it will incur a testing cost of 
$60,000 for its 10 models as a result of amendments to the test 
procedure (or, as a more conservative estimate, $150,000). This

[[Page 14041]]

company has an annual revenue of $1.31 million, and the testing cost of 
$60,000 is approximately 0.92 percent of the company's conversion 
period revenue (or, as a more conservative estimate, a testing cost of 
$150,000 is approximately 2.3 percent of the company's conversion 
period revenue).
    For the third company identified, it will incur a testing cost of 
$24,000 for its 4 models as a result of amendments to the test 
procedure (or, as a more conservative estimate, $60,000). This company 
has an annual revenue of $19.55 million, and the testing cost of 
$24,000 is approximately 0.02 percent of the company's conversion 
period revenue (or, as a more conservative estimate, a testing cost of 
$150,000 is approximately 0.05 percent of the company's conversion 
period revenue).
    For the fourth company identified, it will incur a testing cost of 
$36,000 for its 6 models as a result of amendments to the test 
procedure (or, as a more conservative estimate, $90,000). This company 
has an annual revenue of $3.63 million, and the testing cost of $36,000 
is approximately 0.20 percent of the company's conversion period 
revenue (or, as a more conservative estimate, a testing cost of 
$150,000 is approximately 0.5 percent of the company's conversion 
period revenue). Based on the limited number of small entities affected 
and the de minimis cost impacts, DOE certifies that this final rule 
does not have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities,'' and determines that the preparation of a FRFA is 
not warranted. DOE will transmit 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 air cleaners 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. (See generally 10 CFR part 
429.) The collection-of-information requirement for the certification 
and recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been approved by 
OMB under OMB control number 1910-1400. Public reporting burden for the 
certification is estimated to average 35 hours per response, including 
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing 
the collection of information.
    Certification data will be required for air cleaners; however, DOE 
is not establishing certification or reporting requirements for air 
cleaners in this final rule. Instead, DOE may consider proposals to 
establish certification requirements and reporting for air cleaners 
under a separate rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment 
certification. DOE will address changes to OMB Control Number 1910-1400 
at that time, as necessary.
    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 a new test procedure that it 
expects will be used to develop and implement future energy 
conservation standards for air cleaners. 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.

[[Page 14042]]

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 www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this final 
rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and determined that 
the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate 
that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, 
so these requirements do not apply.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277), requires Federal agencies to issue a 
Family Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family 
well-being. This final rule will not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

    DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation will not 
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth 
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
2001

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most 
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines 
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by 
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and 
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant 
to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, Improving Implementation of the Information 
Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE published updated guidelines that 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 test procedure for air cleaners established in this final rule 
incorporates testing methods contained in certain sections of the 
following commercial standards: AHAM AC-7-2022, AHAM AC-1-2020, and IEC 
62301 Ed. 2.0. DOE has evaluated these standards 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

    AHAM AC-1-2020 is a voluntary industry-accepted test procedure that 
provides test methods to measure the relative reduction of particulate 
matter, including smoke and dust, suspended in the air in a specified 
test chamber when an air cleaner is in operation. Specifically, the 
test procedure codified by this final rule references sections 5 and 6 
of AHAM AC-1-2020 to determine the smoke and dust CADR of the air 
cleaner test unit. AHAM AC-1-2020 is also referenced in several

[[Page 14043]]

sections of AHAM AC-7-2022 that DOE is referencing in its test 
procedure.
    AHAM AC-7-2022 is a voluntary industry-accepted test procedure that 
measures active mode and standby mode power consumption of air 
cleaners. Specifically, the test procedure codified by this final rule 
generally references AHAM AC-7-2022 including provisions for: 
definitions, test conditions, instrumentation, active mode and standby 
mode power measurement, and calculation of PM2.5 CADR, AEC, 
and IEF.
    These standards are reasonably available from AHAM at www.aham.org/AHAM/AuxStore.
    IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 is an international standard that specifies 
methods of measurement of electrical power consumption of household 
appliances in standby mode(s) and other low power modes, as applicable. 
The new appendix FF references AHAM AC-7-2022, to specify the standby 
mode power consumption test method, which further references IEC 62301 
Ed. 2.0 for the measurement of air cleaners standby power consumption. 
IEC 62301 Ed. 2.0 is reasonably available from IEC (webstore.iec.ch).
    ASTM E741-11(2017) specifies techniques using tracer gas dilution 
for determining a single zone's air change with the outdoors, as 
induced by weather conditions and by mechanical ventilation. The new 
appendix FF references AHAM AC-7-2022 to specify the test chamber air 
exchange rate, which further references ASTM E741-11(2017) as the 
method to measure test chamber air exchange rate. ASTM E741-11(2017) is 
reasonably available from ASTM (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

10 CFR Part 429

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Small businesses.

10 CFR Part 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small 
businesses.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February 
21, 2023, by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, 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 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 February 22, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and 
430 of chapter II of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth 
below:

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

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

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.


Sec.  429.11  [Amended]

0
2. Amend paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of Sec.  429.11 by removing the text 
``Sec. Sec.  429.14 through 429.65'' and adding in its place 
``Sec. Sec.  429.14 through 429.68''.

0
3. Add Sec.  429.68 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.68  Air cleaners.

    (a) Sampling plan for selection of units for testing. (1) The 
requirements of Sec.  429.11 are applicable to air cleaners; and
    (2) For each basic mode of air cleaners, a sample of sufficient 
size shall be randomly selected and tested to ensure that--
    (i) Any represented value of annual energy consumption or other 
measure of energy consumption of a basic mode for which consumers would 
favor lower values shall be greater than or equal to the higher of:
    (A) The mean of the sample:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.005
    
Where:

x is the sample mean;
n is the number of samples; and,
xi is the ith sample.

    Or,
    (B) The upper 95 percent confidence limit (UCL) of the true mean 
divided by 1.10:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.006

Where:

x is the sample mean;
s is the sample standard deviation;
n is the number of samples; and,
    t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95 percent one-tailed 
confidence interval with n-1 degrees of freedom (from appendix A).

    And
    (ii) Any represented value of the integrated energy factor or other 
measure of energy consumption of a basic mode for which consumers would 
favor higher values shall be less than or equal to the high:
    (A) The mean of the sample:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.007
    
Where:

x is the sample mean;
    n is the number of samples; and,
xi is the ith sample.

    Or,
    (B) The lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean 
divided by 0.90:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MR23.008

Where:

x is the sample mean;
s is the sample standard deviation;
n is the number of samples; and,
t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95 percent one-tailed 
confidence interval with n-1 degrees of freedom (from appendix A).

    And
    (3) Any represented value of the pollen, smoke, dust, and 
PM2.5 clean air delivery rate (CADR) of a basic model must 
be the mean of the CADR for each tested unit of the basic model. Round 
the mean clean air delivery rate value to the nearest whole number.
    (4) Any represented value of the effective room size, in square 
feet, of a basic model must be calculated as the product of 1.55 and 
the represented smoke CADR value of the basic model as determined in 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section. Round the value of the effective

[[Page 14044]]

room size, in square feet, to the nearest whole number.
    (5) Round the value of the annual energy consumption, in kWh/year, 
of a basic model to the nearest whole number.
    (6) Round the value of the integrated energy factor of a basic 
model to the nearest 0.1 CADR/W.
    (b) [Reserved]

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
4. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.


0
5. Amend Sec.  430.2 by adding in alphabetical order a definition for 
``Conventional room air cleaner'' to read as follows:


Sec.  430.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Conventional room air cleaner means an air cleaner that--
    (1) Is a portable or wall mounted (fixed) unit, excluding ceiling 
mounted unit, that plugs into an electrical outlet;
    (2) Operates with a fan for air circulation; and
    (3) Contains means to remove, destroy, and/or deactivate 
particulates. The term portable is as defined in section 2.1.3.1 of 
AHAM AC-7-2022 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3) and fixed 
is as defined in section 2.1.3.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022.
* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  430.3 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (i)(1) through (7) as (i)(3) through (9);
0
b. Adding new paragraphs (i)(1) and (2);
0
c. Adding paragraph (j)(4); and
0
d. In paragraph (p)(7), removing the text ``and CC'' and adding, in its 
place, the text ``CC, and FF''.
    The additions and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  430.3  Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2020, (``AHAM AC-1-2020''), Method for Measuring 
Performance of Portable Household Electric Room Air Cleaners, ANSI-
approved December 14, 2020, including AHAM Standard Interpretation 
dated September 19, 2022; IBR approved for appendix FF to subpart B.
    (2) AHAM AC-7-2022, Energy Test Method for Consumer Room Air 
Cleaners, copyright 2022; IBR approved for Sec.  430.2 and appendix FF 
to subpart B.
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (4) ASTM E741-11 (Reapproved 2017) (``ASTM E741-11(2017)''), 
Standard Test Method for Determining Air Change in a Single Zone Means 
of a Tracer Gas Dilution Approved Sept. 1, 2017; IBR approved for 
appendix FF to subpart B.
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  430.23 by adding paragraph (hh) to read as follows:


Sec.  430.23  Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water 
consumption.

* * * * *
    (hh) Air cleaners. (1) The pollen clean air delivery rate (CADR), 
smoke CADR, and dust CADR, expressed in cubic feet per minute (cfm), 
for conventional room air cleaners shall be measured in accordance with 
section 5 of appendix FF of this subpart.
    (2) The PM2.5 CADR, expressed in cfm, for conventional 
room air cleaners, shall be measured in accordance with section 5 of 
appendix FF of this subpart.
    (3) The active mode and standby mode power consumption, expressed 
in watts, shall be measured in accordance with sections 5 and 6, 
respectively, of appendix FF of this subpart.
    (4) The annual energy consumption, expressed in kilowatt-hours per 
year, and the integrated energy factor, expressed in CADR per watts 
(CADR/W), for conventional room air cleaners, shall be measured in 
accordance with section 7 of appendix FF of this subpart.
    (5) The estimated annual operating cost for conventional room air 
cleaners, expressed in dollars per year, shall be determined by 
multiplying the following two factors:
    (i) The annual energy consumption as calculated in accordance with 
section 7 of appendix FF of this subpart, and
    (ii) A representative average unit cost of electrical energy in 
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary, the resulting 
product then being rounded off to the nearest dollar per year.

Appendix EE to Subpart B of Part 430 [Reserved]

0
8. Add reserved appendix EE to subpart B of part 430.

0
9. Add Appendix FF to subpart B of part 430 to read as follows:

Appendix FF to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Air Cleaners

    Note: Beginning on the compliance date of any energy 
conservation standards for air cleaners, any representations made 
with respect to the energy use or efficiency of these products, 
including those made for certification purposes, must be made in 
accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this appendix. 
Manufacturers may choose to test in accordance with this appendix to 
certify compliance with any energy conservation standards prior to 
the applicable compliance date for those standards.

0. Incorporation by Reference

    DOE incorporated by reference in Sec.  430.3 the entire standard 
for AHAM AC-1-2020, AHAM AC-7-2022, ASTM E741-11(2017), and IEC 
62301. However, only enumerated provisions of AHAM AC-1-2020, AHAM 
AC-7-2022, and IEC 62301 apply to this appendix, as follows:

0.1 AHAM AC-1-2020

    (a) Sections 4.2 through 4.6;
    (b) Sections 5 through 7;
    (c) Section 8.1;
    (d) Annex A;
    (e) Annex I; and
    (f) AHAM Standard Interpretation.

0.2 AHAM AC-7-2022

    (a) Sections 2.2 and 2.3, sections 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, and 
sections 2.6 through 2.9;
    (b) Sections 3.1 through 3.6.3;
    (c) Section 4;
    (d) Sections 5.3 through 5.7.4; and
    (e) Sections 6 and 7.

0.3 IEC 62301: Household Electrical Appliances--Measurement of Standby 
Power

    (a) Sections 4.4.1 through 4.4.3; and
    (b) Section 5.3.

1. Scope of Coverage

    This appendix contains the test requirements to measure the 
energy performance of a conventional room air cleaner, as defined at 
Sec.  430.2, with smoke CADR and dust CADR between 10 to 600 cubic 
feet per minute (cfm), inclusive.

2. Definitions

    The definitions in sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1 through 2.4.2.4, 2.6 
through 2.8, and 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022 apply to this test procedure, 
including the applicable provisions of Annex I of AHAM AC-1-2020 as 
referenced in section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022.

3. Test Conditions

    Testing conditions shall be as specified in sections 3.1 through 
3.6.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022, including the applicable provisions of 
sections 4.2 through 4.6 and Annex A of AHAM AC-1-2020 as referenced 
in sections 3.2.1, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6.2 of AHAM AC-7-2022 and 
the applicable provisions of ASTM E 741-11(2017) as referenced in 
section 3.3 of AHAM AC-7-2022. Additionally, the following 
requirements are also applicable:
    3.1. Placement for Testing. The air cleaner test unit shall be 
placed in the test chamber as specified in section 3.6.2 of AHAM AC-
7-2022. Additionally, the placement instructions specified in AHAM 
Standard Interpretation in AHAM AC-1-2020 are also applicable.

[[Page 14045]]

    3.2. Air Cleaners with Network Mode Capability. The air cleaner 
software update requirements specified in section 3.6.3.8 of AHAM 
AC-7-2022 are applicable. Additionally, software updates shall be 
conducted, if available, prior to initiating any testing. Software 
updates shall not be bypassed, even if the unit will operate without 
updates.

4. Instrumentation

    Test instruments shall be as specified in section 4 of AHAM AC-
7-2022, including the applicable provisions of sections 4.4.1 
through 4.4.3 of IEC 62301.

5. Active Mode CADR and Power Measurement

    Measurement of smoke CADR, dust CADR, and pollen CADR shall be 
as specified in sections 5 through 7 of AHAM AC-1-2020, 
respectively. Measurement of active mode power shall be as specified 
in sections 5.3 through 5.7.4 of AHAM AC-7-2022, including the 
applicable provisions of sections 5.2.5 and 6.2.5 of AHAM AC-1-2020 
as referenced in section 5.7.1 of AHAM AC-7-2022. Additionally, the 
following requirement is also applicable:
    5.1. Calculation of PM2.5 CADR.
    5.1.1 PM2.5 CADR should be calculated as specified in 
section 2.9 of AHAM AC-7-2022.
    5.1.2. PM2.5 CADR may alternately be calculated using 
the smoke CADR and dust CADR values determined according to sections 
5 and 6, respectively, of AHAM AC-1-2020, according to the following 
equation:

CADR =

6. Standby Mode Power Measurement

    Standby mode power consumption shall be measured as specified in 
section 6 of AHAM AC-7-2022, including the applicable provisions of 
section 5.3 of IEC 62301.

7. Total Energy Calculation

    Annual energy consumption, expressed in kilowatt-hours per year, 
and integrated energy factor, expressed in CADR per watt, shall be 
calculated as specified in section 7 of AHAM AC-7-2022.

[FR Doc. 2023-03987 Filed 3-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P