[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17934-17986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05635]



[[Page 17933]]

Vol. 88

Friday,

No. 57

March 24, 2023

Part II





Department of Energy





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





10 CFR Parts 429 and 431





Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial and 
Industrial Pumps; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 17934]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431

[EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032]
RIN 1904-AE53


Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial and 
Industrial Pumps

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the test procedure for commercial and 
industrial pumps (``pumps'') to incorporate by reference relevant 
portions of the latest version of the industry testing standard, 
expands the scope of clean water pumps covered by this test procedure, 
revises calculation methods for pumps sold with motors and controls to 
better represent field energy use, adds and updates certain 
definitions, and allows the use of alternative efficiency determination 
methods for the rating and certification of pumps.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is April 24, 2023. The 
amendments will be mandatory for product testing starting September 20, 
2023.
    The incorporation by reference of certain materials listed in the 
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on April 24, 
2023. The incorporation by reference of certain other materials listed 
in this rule was approved by the Director of the Federal Register on 
January 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public 
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting 
documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov. 
All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov 
index. However, 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-2020-BT-TP-0032. The docket web page contains instructions 
on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the 
docket.
    For further information on how to review the docket contact the 
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by 
email: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-2J, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 586-9870. Email: [email protected].
    Mr. Nolan Brickwood, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4498. Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE incorporates by reference the following 
industry standards into part 431:

HI 40.6-2021, ``Methods For Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing'';
ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017, ``Rotodynamic Pumps Guideline for NPSH Margin'';
ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016, ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump Piping'';
ANSI/HI 9.8-2018, ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump Intake Design'';
ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and 
Definitions'';
HI Engineering Data Book--Second Edition;

    Copies of HI 40.6-2021, ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017, ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016, 
ANSI/HI 9.8-2018, ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, and the HI Engineering Data 
Book--Second Edition, can be obtained from the Hydraulics Institute 
(HI), 300 Interpace Parkway, 3rd Bldg. A Floor, Parsippany, NJ 07054, 
(973) 267-9700, or online at: www.Pumps.org.

ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 2006), ``Measurement of Liquid Flow 
in Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters'' (``ANSI/
ASME MFC-5M-1985'');
ASME MFC-3M-2004 (Reaffirmed 2017), ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in 
Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi'' (``ASME MFC-3M-2004'');
ASME MFC-8M-2001 (Reaffirmed 2011), ``Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits: 
Connections for Pressure Signal Transmissions Between Primary and 
Secondary Devices'';
ASME MFC-12M-2006 (Reaffirmed 2014), ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in 
Closed Conduits Using Multiport Averaging Pitot Primary Elements'' 
(``ASME MFC-12M-2006'');
ASME MFC-16-2014, ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits with 
Electromagnetic Flowmeters'';
ASME MFC-22-2007 (Reaffirmed 2014), ``Measurement of Liquid by Turbine 
Flowmeters'' (``ASME MFC-22-2007'');

    Copies of ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-
2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, and ASME MFC-22-2007 can be 
obtained from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Two 
Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, (800) 843-2763, or online at: 
www.asme.org.

ANSI/AWWA E103-2015, ``Horizontal and Vertical Line-Shaft Pumps'' 
(``AWWA E103-2015'');

    Copies of AWWA E103-2015 can be obtained from the American Water 
Works Association (AWWA), 6666 W Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (303) 
794-7711, or online at: www.awwa.org.

CSA C390-10, ``Test methods, marking requirements, and energy 
efficiency levels for three-phase induction motors'';

    Copies of CSA C390-10 can be obtained from the Canadian Standards 
Association (CSA), 178 Rexdale Blvd., Toronto, ON, Canada M9W 1R3, 
(800) 463-6727, or online at www.csagroup.org.

IEEE 112-2017, ``IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction 
Motors and Generators'';
IEEE 114-2010, ``IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Single-Phase 
Induction Motors'';

    Copies of IEEE 112-2017 and IEEE 114-2010 can be obtained from the 
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 445 Hoes 
Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854-4141, (732) 981-0060, or online at 
standards.ieee.org.

ISO 1438:2017(E), ``Hydrometry--Open channel flow measurement using 
thin-plate weirs'' (``ISO 1438:2017'');
ISO 2186:2007(E), ``Fluid flow in closed conduits--Connections for 
pressure signal transmissions between primary and secondary elements'' 
(``ISO 2186:2007'');
ISO 2715:2017(E), ``Liquid hydrocarbons--Volumetric measurement by 
turbine flowmeter'' (``ISO 2715:2017'');
ISO 3354:2008(E), ``Measurement of clean water flow in closed 
conduits--Velocity-area method using current-meters in full conduits 
and under regular flow conditions'' (``ISO 3354:2008'');
ISO 3966:2020(E), ``Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits--
Velocity area method using Pitot static tubes'' (``ISO 3996:2020'');
ISO 5167-1:2003(E), ``Measurement of fluid flow by means of pressure 
differential devices inserted in circular cross-section conduits 
running full--Part 1: General

[[Page 17935]]

principles and requirements'' (``ISO 5167-1:2003'');
ISO 5198:1987(E), ``Centrifugal, mixed flow and axial pumps--Code for 
hydraulic performance tests--Precision class'' (``ISO 5198:1987'');
ISO 6416:2017(E), ``Hydrometry--Measurement of discharge by the 
ultrasonic transit time (time of flight) method'' (``ISO 6416:2017'');
ISO 20456:2017(E), ``Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits--
Guidance for the use of electromagnetic flowmeters for conductive 
liquids'' (``ISO 20456:2017'');

    Copies of ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017 can be obtained from the International 
Organization for Standardization (ISO), Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 
1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, or online at: 
www.iso.org.
    For a further discussion of these standards, see section IV.N of 
this document.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
    A. Scope of Applicability
    1. Pumps Not Designed for Clean Water Applications
    2. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
    3. Other Clean Water Pump Categories
    4. Scope Limitations
    B. Definitions
    1. Removing Certain References to Volute
    2. HI Pump Class References
    3. Bowl Diameter
    4. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
    5. Between-Bearing Pumps
    6. Vertical Turbine Pump
    7. Radially-Split, Multi-Stage Horizontal Pumps
    8. Close-Coupled and Mechanically-Coupled Pumps
    C. Updates to Industry Standards
    1. ANSI/HI 40.6
    2. ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014
    D. Metric
    E. Amendments to Test Method
    1. Nominal Speed
    2. Testing of Multi-Stage Pumps
    3. Load Profile
    4. Pumps With BEP at Run-Out
    5. Calibration of Measurement Equipment
    6. Calculations and Rounding
    F. Calculation-Based and Testing-Based Options According to Pump 
Configuration (Table 1 of Appendix A)
    1. Hybrid Mapping Approach
    2. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Induction Motors and 
Controls
    3. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Inverter-Only Motors 
(With or Without Controls)
    4. Pumps Sold With Submersible Motors
    G. Test Procedure for SVIL Pumps
    1. Applicable Motor Regulations
    2. SVIL Paired With Motors Less Than 0.25 Horsepower
    3. SVIL Paired With Other Motors Not Covered by DOE Regulations
    4. Part-Load Loss Curves
    H. Test Procedure for Other Expanded Scope Pumps
    1. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps to HI 40.6
    2. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps With Motors
    I. Sampling Plan, AEDMs, Enforcement Provisions, and Basic Model
    1. Sampling Plan for Determining Represented Values
    2. Alternative Efficiency Determination Methods
    3. Enforcement Provisions
    4. Basic Model Definition
    J. Representations of Energy Use and Energy Efficiency
    K. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
    1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
    2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
    L. Compliance Date
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

    Commercial and industrial pumps (collectively, ``pumps'') are 
included in the list of ``covered equipment'' for which the U.S. 
Department of Energy (``DOE'') is authorized to establish and amend 
energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 
6311(1)(A)) DOE's energy conservation standards and test procedures for 
pumps are currently prescribed at title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (``CFR''), Sec.  431.464, and 10 CFR part 431 subpart Y 
appendix A (``appendix A''). The following sections discuss DOE's 
authority to establish test procedures for pumps and relevant 
background information regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures 
for this equipment.

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, as 
amended (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency 
of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 
U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA,\2\ established the Energy 
Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth 
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This 
equipment includes pumps, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 
6311(1)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 reflect the last statutory amendments that impact 
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test 
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), 
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to 
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316; 42 
U.S.C. 6296).
    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that 
manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1) 
certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable 
energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making other representations about 
the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE 
must use these test procedures to determine whether the equipment 
complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
    Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment 
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations 
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 
U.S.C. 6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297). DOE may, 
however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for particular State laws 
or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other

[[Page 17936]]

provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D).
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for 
covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or 
amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test 
results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual 
operating cost of a given type of covered equipment during a 
representative average use cycle (as determined by the Secretary) and 
requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
    EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate 
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including pumps, to 
determine whether amended test procedures would more accurately or 
fully comply with the requirements for the test procedures to not be 
unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test 
results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated 
operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 
6314(a)(1)
    In addition, if the Secretary determines that a test procedure 
amendment is warranted, the Secretary must publish proposed test 
procedures in the Federal Register, and afford interested persons an 
opportunity (of not less than 45 days' duration) to present oral and 
written data, views, and arguments on the proposed test procedures. (42 
U.S.C. 6314(b)). If DOE determines that test procedure revisions are 
not appropriate, DOE must publish its determination not to amend the 
test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))
    DOE is publishing this final rule in satisfaction of the 7-year 
review requirement specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)(1))

B. Background

    DOE established its test procedure for pumps in a final rule 
published on January 25, 2016. 81 FR 4086 (``January 2016 Final 
Rule'').\3\ The January 2016 Final Rule established definitions for the 
terms ``pump,'' \4\ ``driver,'' \5\ and ``controls,'' \6\ and 
identified several categories and configurations of pumps. The pumps 
test procedure currently incorporates by reference the Hydraulic 
Institute (``HI'') Standard 40.6-2014, ``Methods for Rotodynamic Pump 
Efficiency Testing'' (``HI 40.6-2014''), along with several 
modifications to that testing method related to measuring the hydraulic 
power, shaft power, and electric input power of pumps, inclusive of 
electric motors and any continuous or non-continuous controls.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On March 23, 2016, DOE published a correction to the January 
2016 Final Rule to correct the placement of the product-specific 
enforcement provisions related to pumps under 10 CFR 429.134(i). 81 
FR 15426.
    \4\ A ``pump'' means equipment designed to move liquids (which 
may include entrained gases, free solids, and totally dissolved 
solids) by physical or mechanical action and includes a bare pump 
and, if included by the manufacturer at the time of sale, mechanical 
equipment, driver, and controls. (10 CFR 431.462)
    \5\ A ``driver'' provides mechanical input to drive a bare pump 
directly or through the use of mechanical equipment. Electric 
motors, internal combustion engines, and gas/steam turbines are 
examples of drivers. (10 CFR 431.462)
    \6\ A ``control'' is used to operate a driver. (10 CFR 431.462)
    \7\ A ``continuous control'' is a control that adjusts the speed 
of the pump driver continuously over the driver operating speed 
range in response to incremental changes in the required pump flow, 
head, or power output. A ``non-continuous control'' is a control 
that adjusts the speed of a driver to one of a discrete number of 
non-continuous preset operating speeds and does not respond to 
incremental reductions in the required pump flow, head, or power 
output. 10 CFR 431.462.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 28, 2020, DOE published an early assessment review 
request for information (``RFI'') to determine whether to proceed with 
a rulemaking to amend the test procedure for pumps. 85 FR 60734 
(``September 2020 Early Assessment RFI''). DOE subsequently published 
an RFI on April 16, 2021 seeking further data and information 
pertaining to the test procedure for pumps. 86 FR 20075 (``April 2021 
RFI''). On April 11, 2022, DOE published a test procedure notice of 
proposed rulemaking presenting DOE's proposals to amend the pumps test 
procedure. 87 FR 21268 (``April 2022 NOPR''). DOE held a public meeting 
related to the April 2022 NOPR on April 26, 2022 (``NOPR public 
meeting'').
    DOE received comments in response to the April 2022 NOPR from the 
interested parties listed in Table I.1.

            Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the April 2022 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Reference in this final   Comment No. in
              Commenter(s)                           rule               the docket          Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appliance Standards Awareness Project,    Efficiency Advocates......              30  Efficiency Organizations.
 American Council for an Energy-
 Efficient Economy, Natural Resources
 Defense Council.
ebm-pabst, Inc..........................  ebm-pabst.................             n/a  Motor Manufacturer.
Grundfos Americas Corporation...........  Grundfos..................              31  Manufacturer.
Hydraulic Institute.....................  HI........................              33  Trade Association.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance....  NEEA......................              34  Efficiency Organization.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San     CA IOUs...................              32  Utilities.
 Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern
 California Edison; collectively, the
 California Investor-Owned Utilities.
People's Republic of China..............  China.....................              29  Country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or 
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\8\ 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop 
test procedures for pumps. (Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032, 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 amends Sec. Sec.  431.462, 431.463, 
431.464, and appendix A as follows:

[[Page 17937]]

    (1) Expand the scope of the test procedure to include additional 
clean water pumps, specifically radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal 
(``RSH'') pumps; radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal in-line 
diffuser casing (``RSHIL'') pumps; radially-split, multi-stage, 
horizontal, end-suction diffuser casing (``RSHES'') pumps; small 
vertical in-line (``SVIL'') pumps; vertical turbine (``VT'') pumps; 
pumps sold with 6-pole induction motors or motors with design speeds 
greater than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm; and end-
suction pumps not covered by the current test procedure;
    (2) Clarify the applicability of the design temperature range and 
modify the range parameters;
    (3) Add and modify certain definitions in 10 CFR 431.462 to 
accommodate the expansion of the test procedure's scope and to clarify 
existing definitions;
    (4) Incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 into 10 CFR 431.463 and 
remove language in the DOE test procedure that is redundant with HI 
40.6-2021;
    (5) Clarify certain test provisions for pumps with BEP at run-out;
    (6) Update part-load loss factor equation coefficients in the 
calculation method for pumps sold with induction motors and controls;
    (7) Provide a calculation method for pumps sold with inverter-only 
motors;
    (8) Update the test procedure for submersible pumps to address 
DOE's coverage of submersible motors;
    (9) Add provisions for testing and rating RSH, SVIL, VT pumps, and 
pumps sold with a 6-pole induction motors or with design speeds greater 
than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm; and
    (10) Allow use of alternative efficiency determination methods 
(``AEDMs'').
    The adopted amendments are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the 
current test procedure provision prior to the amendment, as well as the 
reason for the adopted change.

      Table II.1--Summary of Changes in the Amended Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  DOE test procedure prior to
           amendment            Amended test procedure     Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not include in the scope   Includes in the scope   Improved
 of the test procedure RSHIL,    of the test procedure   representativen
 RSHES, SVIL, or VT pumps;       RSHIL, RSHES, SVIL,     ess.
 pumps distributed in commerce   and VT pumps; pumps
 with nominal speeds of 1,200    distributed in
 rpm; or all end-suction pumps.  commerce with nominal
                                 speeds of 1,200 rpm;
                                 and all end-suction
                                 pumps.
Includes a scope limitation of  Specifies a scope       Improved clarity
 a design temperature range      limitation of a pump    and
 from 14 to 248 [deg]F.          whose design            enforceability.
                                 temperature range
                                 falls wholly or
                                 partially into the
                                 range from 15 to 250
                                 [deg]F.
Includes definitions for pump   Includes definitions    Required for
 categories within the current   for additional pump     scope
 scope of the test procedure.    categories and          expansion;
                                 clarifications to the   improved
                                 definitions for some    enforceability.
                                 existing pump
                                 categories.
Incorporates by reference HI    Incorporates by         Updates to
 40.6-2014 for determining the   reference HI 40.6-      applicable
 constant load pump energy       2021 for determining    industry test
 index (``PEICL'') and the       the PEICL and the       standard.
 variable load pump energy       PEIVL value of pumps.
 index (``PEIVL'') value of
 pumps.
Provides example pump           Removes example pump    Simplification
 categories for certain pump     categories from all     of the test
 definitions by referencing      relevant definitions.   procedure.
 ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/
 HI 2.1-2.2-2014.
References ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-     Incorporates a          Simplification
 2014 to define ``intermediate   definition for          of the test
 bowl'' within the definition    ``intermediate bowl''   procedure.
 for bowl diameter.              in the definition for
                                 bowl diameter,
                                 removing the
                                 reference to ANSI/HI
                                 2.1-2.2-2014.
Does not include test           Includes                Required for
 provisions for multistage       specifications for      scope
 pumps other than RSV and ST.    stages for testing      expansion.
                                 for RSHIL, RSHES, and
                                 VT pumps.
Includes provisions for pumps   Clarifies provisions    Improved
 with BEP at run-out.            for pumps with BEP at   repeatability
                                 run-out.                and
                                                         reproducibility
                                                         .
References a section of HI      Clarifies the           Improved
 40.6-2014 related to            applicable test         repeatability
 calibration of measurement      provisions in HI 40.6-  and
 equipment.                      2021 for calibration    reproducibility
                                 of measurement          .
                                 equipment.
Includes a calculation method   Includes revised part-  Improved
 for pumps sold with induction   load loss factor        representativen
 motors and controls.            equation coefficients   ess.
                                 for motors 50 hp and
                                 above.
Does not provide a calculation  Provides a calculation  Reduced burden.
 method for pumps sold with      method for pumps sold
 inverter-only motors.           with inverter-only
                                 motors.
Includes test provisions        Includes test           Allows for
 specific to submersible pumps   provisions specific     seamless update
 based on default motor          to submersible pumps    if or when DOE
 efficiency.                     based on DOE's          finalizes
                                 coverage of             submersible
                                 submersible motors.     motor coverage.
Does not include test           Includes test           Required for
 provisions specific to SVILs.   provisions specific     scope
                                 to SVILs.               expansion.
Does not include provisions     Includes provisions     Improved
 for testing pumps distributed   for testing pumps       representativen
 in commerce with 6-pole         sold with 6-pole        ess.
 motors or motors with design    motors or motors with
 speeds greater than or equal    design speeds greater
 to 960 rpm and less than        than or equal to 960
 1,440 rpm.                      rpm and less than
                                 1,440 rpm.
Does not allow use of AEDMs...  Allows use of AEDMs...  Reduced burden.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 17938]]

    DOE has determined that the amendments described in section III of 
this final rule would not alter the measured efficiency \9\ of 
commercial and industrial pumps that are currently included in the 
scope of DOE's energy conservation standards for pumps. Therefore, DOE 
does not expect that retesting or recertification would be necessary 
for currently certified pumps as a result of DOE's adoption of the 
amendments to the test procedures. Additionally, DOE has determined 
that the amendments would not increase the cost of testing for these 
pumps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ DOE is updating the induction motor coefficients (see 
section III.F.2 of this document) which will change the calculated 
rating for pumps sold with induction motors. However, DOE expects 
the updated calculations will provide a PEI equal to or less than 
that determined using the current induction motor coefficients. 
Since the pump would be considered more efficient, manufacturers 
would not have to recertify their basic models, although they could 
voluntarily choose to do so. As such, DOE has determined that the 
updated induction motor coefficients will not increase manufacturer 
burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For pumps that are not currently within the scope of the test 
procedure but are subject to the expansion of scope adopted by this 
final rule, use of the DOE test procedure as amended by this final rule 
is not required until the compliance date of any energy conservation 
standards that DOE may ultimately establish for such pumps as part of a 
separate rulemaking assessing the technological feasibility and 
economic justification for such standards.
    The effective date for the amended test procedures adopted in this 
final rule is 30 days after publication of this document in the Federal 
Register. Representations of energy use or energy efficiency must be 
based on testing in accordance with the amended test procedures 
beginning 180 days after the publication of this final rule. (42 U.S.C. 
6314(d))
    Discussion of DOE's actions are addressed in detail in section III 
of this final rule.

III. Discussion

A. Scope of Applicability

    The current DOE test procedure for pumps applies to five categories 
of ``clean water pumps'' with specific defined characteristics and 
excludes certain defined categories \10\ of pumps. 10 CFR 
431.464(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The excluded categories of pumps are fire pumps; self-
priming pumps; prime-assist pumps; magnet driven pumps; pumps 
designed to be used in a nuclear facility subject to 10 CFR part 50, 
``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities''; and 
pumps meeting the design and construction requirements set forth in 
Military Specifications: MIL-P-17639F, ``Pumps, Centrifugal, 
Miscellaneous Service, Naval Shipboard Use'' (as amended); MIL-P-
17881D, ``Pumps, Centrifugal, Boiler Feed, (Multi-Stage)'' (as 
amended); MIL-P-17840C, ``Pumps, Centrifugal, Close-Coupled, Navy 
Standard (For Surface Ship Application)'' (as amended); MIL-P-
18682D, ``Pump, Centrifugal, Main Condenser Circulating, Naval 
Shipboard'' (as amended); and MIL-P-18472G, ``Pumps, Centrifugal, 
Condensate, Feed Booster, Waste Heat Boiler, And Distilling Plant'' 
(as amended). 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE defines ``clean water pump'' as a pump that is designed for use 
in pumping water with a maximum non-absorbent free solid content of 
0.016 pounds per cubic foot, and with a maximum dissolved solid content 
of 3.1 pounds per cubic foot, provided that the total gas content of 
the water does not exceed the saturation volume and disregarding any 
additives necessary to prevent the water from freezing at a minimum of 
14 [deg]F. 10 CFR 431.462.
    The five categories of clean water pumps to which the current test 
procedure applies are: end-suction close-coupled (``ESCC''); end-
suction frame mounted/own bearings (``ESFM''); in-line (``IL''); 
radially-split, multi-stage, vertical, in-line diffuser casing 
(``RSV''); and submersible turbine (``ST''). 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i). 
The defined characteristics specify limits on flow rate, maximum head, 
design temperature range, motor type, bowl diameter, and speed.\11\ 10 
CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii). In the context of the energy conservation 
standards, pumps are further delineated into equipment classes based on 
nominal speed of rotation and operating mode (i.e., constant load or 
variable load). 10 CFR 431.465.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ More specifically, these characteristics include: (A) flow 
rate of 25 gallons per minute or greater at best efficiency point 
(``BEP'') and full impeller diameter; (B) maximum head of 459 feet 
at BEP and full impeller diameter and the number of stages required 
for testing; (C) design temperature range from 14 to 248 [deg]F; (D) 
designed to operate with either (1) a 2- or 4-pole induction motor, 
or (2) a non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating 
range that includes speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 
revolutions per minute (``rpm'') and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm, and in 
either case, the driver and impeller must rotate at the same speed; 
(E) For ST pumps, a 6-inch or smaller bowl diameter; and (F) For 
ESCC and ESFM pumps, a specific speed less than or equal to 5,000 
when calculated using U.S. customary units. 10 CFR 
431.464(a)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed expanding the test procedure 
scope to include BB, RSH, RSHIL, RSHES, SVIL, and VT pumps, as well as 
pumps sold with 6-pole induction motors or motors with design speeds 
between 960 rpm and 1,440 rpm; ST pumps with bowl diameters greater 
than 6 inches; and end-suction pumps not covered by the current test 
procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21272.
    The CA IOUs, Efficiency Advocates, and NEEA supported DOE's 
proposal to expand the test procedure scope to include additional 
pumps. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 1-3; 
CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 1) NEEA commented that sales reported to its 
commercial and industrial pumps efficiency program indicated these 
pumps should be included in the scope of the test procedure and that 
this would avoid pumps outside the scope from competing with regulated 
pumps without the costs of complying with the efficiency standards and 
labeling requirements. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2)
    HI stated that the proposed scope expansion could be tested to HI 
40.6-2021 but commented that DOE should consider the benefits of 
including larger pumps, since these pumps are often sold in much 
smaller volumes and the capital and manufacturing impacts will be 
disproportionate compared to energy savings for the current scope. (HI, 
No. 33 at p. 1) HI also stated that these larger pumps may require 
different testing infrastructure and instrumentation and that this 
would require substantial capital investment for testing. Id.
    DOE addresses HI's comments in the following sections relative to 
specific pump categories. The following sections also provide 
additional information and responses to stakeholder comments specific 
to the pumps that DOE considered for inclusion in the test procedure 
scope.
1. Pumps Not Designed for Clean Water Applications
    The scope of the current DOE test procedure, as described 
previously, does not include either chemical process or wastewater 
pumps. See 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i). Chemical process pumps are designed 
to pump fluids other than water, and wastewater pumps are designed for 
water with a higher level of free solids than clean water pumps. In the 
April 2022 NOPR, in response to comments received on the April 2021 
RFI, DOE explained that although certain non-clean water pumps may be 
used in clean water applications, DOE expects the number of non-clean 
water pumps used in the clean water applications to be relatively 
small. 87 FR 21268, 21275. DOE noted that the relevant industry 
standards do not provide requirements for testing pumps designed for 
non-clean water applications. Id. To test non-clean water pumps, DOE 
would need to reference or develop an alternate test procedure. Id. 
While this test procedure might enable comparison between non-clean 
water pumps, it is unlikely that a clean water and non-clean water test 
procedure would provide comparable results. Id.

[[Page 17939]]

    Additionally, DOE noted that non-clean water pumps, specifically 
wastewater pumps, must meet specific performance requirements to ensure 
the health of the U.S. population. 87 FR 21268, 21275. DOE would need 
to carefully evaluate how the performance of non-clean water pumps 
could be impacted by energy conservation standards and ensure that 
public health and safety would not be negatively affected. Id. As such, 
additional investigation would be needed to understand the market, 
energy savings potential, test procedure implications, and performance 
requirements of non-clean water pumps (i.e., chemical process and 
wastewater). Id. DOE noted that because ``C-value'' is specified in the 
energy conservation standard (see 10 CFR 431.465(b)(4)) and C-value is 
required for determining PEICL and PEIVL, there 
would be limited use of the test procedure without corresponding 
standards. Id. Therefore, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively 
determined to continue to limit the applicability of the test procedure 
to clean water pumps. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, NEEA requested that DOE add 
ASME B73 \12\ compliant pumps in the clean water definition. (NEEA, No. 
34 at p. 2-4) NEEA explained that pumps that meet the requirements of 
ANSI/ASME Standard B73.1-2012 or ANSI/ASME B73.2-2002 are often used in 
pumping clean water. Id. NEEA further stated that these pumps are often 
advertised as serving clean water functions and have been certified for 
that end use--some for drinking water components. Since these pumps 
overlap and compete directly with covered pumps in clean water 
applications, NEEA argued that they potentially create a compliance 
loophole. Id. NEEA suggested that DOE no longer consider ASME B73 
certified pumps to be excluded from the clean water definition and 
clarified that they did not believe DOE would need to change the 
current or proposed scope of pumps to do so. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4) 
NEEA stated that ending the exclusion was sufficient, and that in doing 
so DOE would only be including those ASME B73 certified pumps that 
advertise as clean water pumps and compete directly with clean water 
pumps. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Pumps certified under the ASME B73 designation include: 
B73.1 (``Specification for Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps 
for Chemical Process''), B73.2 (``Specification for Vertical In-Line 
Centrifugal Pumps for Chemical Process''), B73.3 (``Specification 
for Sealless Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps for Chemical 
Process''), and B73.5 (``Thermoplastic/thermoset Polymer Material 
Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps Chemical Process''). All 
B73 pumps are designed for use as chemical process pumps, which have 
specific design requirements related to reliability and performance 
such as maximum shaft deflections, bearing frame lubrication, 
sealing requirements, and vibration limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to NEEA, any pump designed for non-clean water 
applications would also be capable of pumping clean water. However, DOE 
notes that the definition of clean water pump specifies that the pump 
is designed for use in pumping [clean water] (emphasis added). See 10 
CFR 431.462. DOE further notes that the ASME B73 pumps have additional 
design requirements for maximum shaft deflections, bearing frame 
lubrication, sealing, and vibration limits because they are designed 
for use in chemical process applications.
    Because of the additional design requirements applicable to ASME 
B73 pumps, it is unlikely that a manufacturer of clean water pumps 
would certify to ASME B73 as a way to avoid DOE energy conservation 
standards. DOE market research indicates that the prices of ASME B73 
pumps are typically substantially higher than the clean water pumps 
that are included in this rulemaking, presumably due to these 
additional design requirements. Therefore, DOE does not expect end 
users to specifically purchase ASME B73 pumps for use as replacements 
for clean water pumps currently covered by DOE energy conservation 
standards. Finally, DOE is not aware of ASME B73 pumps being 
distributed in commerce as substitutes for clean water pumps to any 
significant degree. Given these considerations, DOE is not amending the 
definition of clean water pump to specifically include pumps certified 
under the ASME B73 designation in this rulemaking.
    The Efficiency Advocates encouraged DOE to investigate ways to 
accelerate adoption of variable speed drives (``VSDs'') in nonclean 
water applications, stating that pumps in chemical and wastewater 
sectors are estimated to use more than 27 and 17 TWh/yr of electricity 
respectively. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 4) They cited a 2020 
study by NEEA showing that VSDs provided average energy savings of 23 
percent and 43 percent for constant- and variable-load clean water 
pumping applications, respectively. Id. The Efficiency Advocates 
concluded from this study that there are significant potential savings 
from using VSDs, noting that wastewater flow can vary significantly 
over time and may benefit especially. Id. Efficiency Advocates 
encouraged DOE to develop the test procedure for VSDs in non-clean 
water applications in order to facilitate greater market adoption of 
VSDs in wastewater and chemical process pumps and capture the potential 
energy-savings benefits.
    In response to the Efficiency Advocates, DOE reiterates its 
discussion in the April 2022 NOPR that DOE expects the number of non-
clean water pumps used in the clean water applications to be relatively 
small; that the scope of HI 40.6-2014, which is currently incorporated 
by reference into the DOE test procedure, includes clean water pumps 
only, and that it is unlikely that a clean water and non-clean water 
test procedure would provide comparable results. 87 FR 21268, 21275. 
DOE emphasizes that waste water pumps, in particular, are required to 
pump slurries/solids. DOE is incorporating by reference HI 40.6-2021, 
which is only applicable to clean water pumps. If DOE were to include 
waste water and other clean water pumps in its scope of coverage, it 
would need to evaluate the applicability and repeatability of industry 
test procedures for these pumps. DOE has not had an opportunity to 
appropriately evaluate these test procedures or conduct its own testing 
on non-clean water pumps during this test procedure rulemaking; 
however, DOE may consider evaluating these pumps in a future 
rulemaking.
    In summary, the scope of the test procedure as amended by this 
final rule continues to exclude both chemical process and wastewater 
pumps.
    Regarding VSDs, DOE notes that its current test procedure 
accommodates pumps with variable speed operation by providing 
calculations for determining variable load PEI (``PEIVL''). 
(See Appendix A to subpart Y of part 431.) However, as discussed, DOE 
is continuing to exclude wastewater pumps from the scope of the test 
procedure.
2. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
    As discussed, the scope of the current DOE test procedure is 
limited to five categories of pumps designed for clean water 
applications. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i). One of these categories is IL 
pumps, which are limited to a shaft input power greater than or equal 
to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at best efficiency point 
(``BEP'') \13\ and full impeller diameter, and in which liquid is 
discharged in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft. 10 CFR 
431.462. In 2016, a Circulator Pump Working Group \14\ recommended a 
test procedure

[[Page 17940]]

and energy conservation standard for circulator pumps, which DOE is 
addressing in a separate rulemaking, and also made recommendations for 
SVIL pumps. SVIL pumps have characteristics identical to those for in-
line pumps except SVIL pumps have shaft input power of less than 1 hp. 
The Circulator Pump Working Group recommended that (1) SVIL pumps be 
evaluated using the PEICL or PEIVL metric, and 
(2) SVIL pumps should be tested using the DOE commercial and industrial 
pump test procedure, with any needed modifications determined by DOE. 
(Docket No. EERE-2016-BT-STD-0004, No. 58 Recommendation #1B at pp. 1-
2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ BEP is the pump hydraulic power operating point (consisting 
of both flow and head conditions) that results in the maximum 
efficiency.
    \14\ On February 3, 2016, DOE published its intention to 
establish a working group under the Appliance Standards and 
Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (``ASRAC'') to negotiate a 
test procedure and energy conservation standards for circulator 
pumps. 81 FR 5658. Throughout this document, this working group is 
referred to as the ``Circulator Pump Working Group''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 2022 NOPR, consistent with the Circulator Pump Working 
Group recommendation, DOE proposed to include SVIL pumps in the pump 
test procedure scope as an extension of IL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21275-
21276. DOE tentatively determined that SVIL pumps can be tested using 
the current DOE pumps test procedure with certain additional 
modifications. The metric and test procedure for SVIL pumps are 
discussed in sections III.D and III.G of this notice. Moreover, DOE 
stated in the April 2022 NOPR that it expects that including SVIL pumps 
in the pumps test procedure would reduce confusion over which inline 
pumps are and are not subject to energy conservation standards. Id. DOE 
requested comment on its proposal to expand the scope of the test 
procedure to cover SVIL pumps.
    HI, NEEA, the CA IOUs, and the Efficiency Advocates agreed with 
including SVIL pumps in the scope of the test procedure, and Grundfos 
agreed that SVILs should be an extension of IL pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 
2; NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates, 
No. 30 at pp. 2-3; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1) Grundfos also commented 
that it sells a small number of SVIL pumps without a motor, but it does 
not believe that SVILs sold without motors should be excluded from the 
regulation. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
    Due to the overlap between SVILs and circulators, NEEA and the CA 
IOUs expressed support for the development of standards to ensure that 
efficiencies of both are comparable. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4; CA IOUs, 
No. 32 at p. 2) NEEA stated their finding that 12 percent of IL pumps 
(excluding circulator pumps) are less than 1 hp, and that SVILs are 
therefore an important and overlapping segment of the market. (NEEA, 
No. 34 at p. 4) NEEA stated that it believes broadening the scope to 
include SVILs will help to avoid market confusion or gaps in coverage. 
Id.
    For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs and in the 
April 2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal to include SVILs in the 
scope of the test procedure. DOE finalizes a definition for SVIL pumps 
in section III.B.4 of this document. In response to Grundfos' comment, 
DOE's finalized test procedure, as discussed in section III.G, incudes 
methods to test SVILs both with and without motors. DOE will address 
the development of standards separately in the ongoing pumps energy 
conservation standards rulemaking.
3. Other Clean Water Pump Categories
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to expand the current test 
procedure's scope to include additional clean water pumps. 87 FR 21268, 
21276-21279. The following sections discuss DOE's consideration of 
additional pump categories in the scope of the test procedure.
a. Between-Bearing Pumps
    Section 1.2.9.2 of ANSI-HI 14.1-14.2-2019 describes between-bearing 
pumps as pumps that are one- or two-stage, axially-split, mounted to a 
baseplate, driven by a motor via a flexible coupling, and with bearings 
on both ends of the rotating assembly.
    Based on a review of the market, BB pumps are generally larger than 
the pumps currently subject to the DOE test procedure. Many BB pumps 
exceed the head and horsepower limits in the current DOE test 
procedure. Additionally, BB pumps are not typically designed for clean 
water applications. Despite these generalities, DOE has identified 
certain clean water BB pumps under 200 hp and 459 feet of head that 
could be viewed as potentially interchangeable with pumps that are 
currently included in the scope of the current DOE test procedure.
    To address the potential for pumps that provide unregulated 
alternatives to the pumps currently subject to the DOE test procedure, 
DOE proposed to include BB pumps within the scope of the DOE test 
procedure in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21277. However, DOE did 
not propose to expand scope beyond clean water pumps, and did not 
propose to expand the head or horsepower limitations currently listed 
in 10 CFR 431.464(1)(ii). Id. DOE noted that while many BB pumps exceed 
the test procedure's head or horsepower limitations, an expansion of 
the current head and horsepower restrictions has the potential to 
increase test burden by requiring larger laboratory equipment to test 
pumps according to the DOE test procedure and most of the larger BB 
pumps were not designed for clean water. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the CA IOUs, the Efficiency 
Advocates, and Grundfos supported DOE's proposal to expand the test 
procedure scope to include BB pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3; 
Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-3; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1) The 
CA IOUs commented that BB pumps are high-cost, low-sale pumps and that 
they anticipate BB pumps will be larger, with motor horsepower of 100 
or over. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) The CA IOUs also cited industry 
literature indicating that efficiency can be improved by balancing the 
impeller forces in BB pumps. Id.
    HI disagreed that BB1 \15\ pumps are commercially acceptable 
replacements for currently regulated pumps due to design and cost 
considerations. (HI, No. 33 at p. 2) HI stated that the price for a BB1 
pump compared to a currently regulated pump would be two times or more. 
Id. Despite supporting DOE's proposal to include BB pumps in the test 
procedure scope, Grundfos stated that it expects testing these pumps 
will increase test burden because of their large size, larger motor 
sizes required for test, and the potential for additional test 
fixtures. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ BB1 pumps are a pump class defined by HI 14.1-14.2-2019 
that are 1 and 2 stage, axially-split pumps with the impeller(s) 
mounted between bearings at either end. BB1 pumps are a specific 
sub-category of BB pumps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on stake holder comments, feedback from manufacturer 
interviews, and additional reviews of product literature, DOE has 
determined that BB pumps do not serve as replacements for pumps 
currently covered by the DOE test procedure. For a given load point, a 
BB pump will be larger, heavier, and more expensive than an equivalent 
end suction pump. Therefore, it is making it very unlikely that 
customers would choose to replace a regulated end suction pump with an 
unregulated BB pump. Additionally, DOE has determined that 
manufacturers of BB pumps would likely need to build new test stands to 
test their BB products using the DOE test procedure. DOE notes that 
because most BB pumps are outside of the DOE test procedure scope, due 
to their flow and head exceeding the maximum flow and head set by DOE. 
Therefore, if DOE were to include BB pumps in this test procedure, BB 
pump manufacturers would need to make substantial capital investments 
to test and certify a very small number of

[[Page 17941]]

pumps. This would result in a test cost per basic model that is as much 
as 100 times higher than DOE's estimate presented in the April 2022 
NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21309. Test costs are discussed in more detail in 
section III.K.1. Since customers are not expected to use BB pumps as 
replacements for end suction pumps and test burden for BB pump 
manufacturers would be very high relative to the number of pumps 
tested, DOE has determined that the potential benefits of including BB 
pumps within the scope of this test procedure are outweighed by the 
burdens associated with testing and certifying such products. As such, 
in this final rule DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of 
this test procedure.
b. Vertical Turbine Pumps
    As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined 
that ST pumps and VT pumps have similar end uses. 87 FR 21268, 21277. 
Additionally, DOE tentatively determined that ST and VT pumps have 
similar bowl and impeller assemblies, and that VT pumps may even share 
an identical assembly with an ST pump produced by the same 
manufacturer. Id. To address the potential for pumps that provide 
unregulated alternatives to the pumps currently subject to the DOE test 
procedure, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to include VT pumps, 
with no limit on bowl diameter for inclusion in the DOE test procedure. 
Id.
    In response to DOE's proposal in the April 2022 NOPR, the 
Efficiency Advocates expressed support for DOE's scope expansion to 
cover VT pumps. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-3) The CA IOUs 
commended DOE for including VT pumps and asserted that regulating 
equipment used for accessing groundwater in irrigation applications is 
important because at least 30 percent of the wells in Texas and 
California use VT pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2)
    HI stated that expanding the test procedure scope to include VT 
pumps would add a substantial burden for manufacturers who will have to 
test low-speed and large-diameter pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3) HI 
continued by stating that these large-diameter VT pumps may be 
assembled and tested on site, and that manufacturers may or may not 
have the capacity to test VT pumps in their test facilities. Id.
    DOE is finalizing its proposal to include VT pumps in the pumps 
test procedure scope. However, DOE is not adopting its proposal to 
include these pumps without a limit on bowl diameter, and is instead 
limiting the scope of VT pumps to bowl diameters less than or equal to 
six inches, consistent with the existing test procedure and energy 
conservation standards size limitation for ST pumps. HI indicated that 
expanding bowl diameter to greater than 6 inches for VT and ST pumps 
may have a significant impact on manufacturer test burden. DOE expects 
test time and cost for VT pumps with bowl diameters less than or equal 
to 6 inches is equivalent to that for ST pumps with bowl diameters less 
than or equal to 6 inches because of the similar physical 
characteristics and hydraulic properties for these pump classes. DOE's 
determination to exclude VT and ST pumps with bowl diameters greater 
than 6 inches is discussed in more detail in section III.A.4.a. of this 
document.
    Based on its review of pump literature and pump schematics, DOE has 
determined that the current DOE test procedure based on HI 40.6-2021 is 
applicable to VT pumps and that therefore VT pumps can be easily added 
to the scope of the DOE test procedure. In addition, including 
provisions for VT pumps in the DOE test procedure will give consumers 
the ability to easily compare the efficiency of different VT and ST 
pump models serving similar applications. Lastly, creating a uniform 
test procedure and rating method for VT pumps will enable DOE to 
consider establishing energy conservation standards for these pumps. 
The definition for VT pumps is discussed in section III.B.6 of this 
document. DOE addresses the question of test burden in section 
III.K.1.a. of this document.
c. Radially-Split Multi-Stage Horizontal Pumps
    The current DOE test procedure includes RSV pumps, but does not 
include RSH pumps, which are also multistage pumps used primarily in 
heating, cooling, and pressure boosting applications.
    DOE has surveyed pump and end-product materials and literature 
available online and has concluded that RSV and RSH pumps are marketed 
for similar applications, and that RSH pumps could be substituted for 
RSV pumps and may provide a regulatory loophole to RSV pumps. 
Additionally, DOE determined that RSH pumps can be tested using the 
current DOE test procedure. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to 
include RSH pumps with both in-line (``RSHIL'') and end-suction 
(``RSHES'') flow configurations in its test procedure scope. 87 FR 
21268, 21278.
    In response to the proposal to include RSH pumps in the test 
procedure scope, Grundfos stated that it agrees with adding RSHES pumps 
to the scope but requested additional information regarding which 
products meet the definitions and whether they should be considered 
under a single pump category. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2) The Efficiency 
Advocates supported DOE expanding its test procedure scope to include 
RSHIL and RSHES configurations. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-
3) HI commented that the addition of RSH pumps will add manufacturer 
test burden. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3)
    DOE has determined that the current DOE test procedure based on HI 
40.6-2021 is applicable to RSH pumps, and that therefore RSH pumps can 
be easily added to the scope of the DOE test procedure. In addition, 
including provisions for RSH pumps in the DOE test procedure will give 
consumers the ability to easily compare the efficiency of different RSH 
and RSV pump models. Lastly, creating a uniform test procedure and 
rating method for RSH pumps will enable DOE to consider establishing 
energy conservation standards for these pumps. DOE is finalizing its 
proposal to include RSH pumps, specifically RSHIL and RSHES pumps, in 
the scope of the DOE test procedure. Definitions for RSH, RSHES, and 
RSHIL are discussed in section III.B.7 of this document. DOE addresses 
the question of test burden in section III.K.1.a. of this document.
d. End-Suction Pumps Similar to ESFM and ESCC Pumps
    DOE defines a ``close-coupled pump'' as a pump having a motor shaft 
that also serves as the impeller shaft, and defines a ``mechanically-
coupled pump'' as a pump that has its own impeller shaft and bearings 
separate from the motor shaft. 10 CFR 431.462. As discussed in the 
April 2021 RFI, DOE is aware that certain pumps may have their own 
shaft, but with no bearings to support that shaft. 86 FR 20075, 20078. 
Additionally, while the close-coupled pump definition describes a pump 
in which the motor shaft also serves as the pump shaft, the definition 
does not provide detail on how the motor and pump shaft may be 
connected. DOE has observed that some manufacturers describe close-
coupled pumps as using an adapter to mount the impeller directly to the 
motor shaft. The coupling type is the only differentiator between ESCC 
pumps, which are ``close-coupled pumps,'' and ESFM pumps, which are 
``mechanically-coupled pumps.'' In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE 
noted that it intended for ESFM and ESCC pumps to be mutually exclusive 
to ensure that pumps that are close-coupled to the motor and have a 
single impeller and

[[Page 17942]]

motor shaft would be part of the ESCC equipment category, while all 
other end-suction pumps that are mechanically-coupled to the motor and 
for which the bare pump and motor have separate shafts would be part of 
the ESFM equipment category. 81 FR 4086, 4096. Despite this intention, 
DOE is aware that these definitions may have excluded some end-suction 
pumps from the test procedure scope.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, based on comment responses from the April 
2021 RFI and DOE's review of ESCC and ESFM pumps, DOE tentatively 
determined that there is a group of end-suction pumps that do not 
currently fall into either the ESFM or ESCC definition, but which may 
be competitors to the currently regulated pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21278. 
Therefore, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to ensure that all 
clean water end-suction pumps are covered by the test procedure by 
revising the definitions of ESFM and ESCC pumps. Id. DOE tentatively 
determined that no test procedure revisions would be needed to 
accommodate these additional end-suction pumps. Id.
    In response to DOE's proposal in the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos and 
the Efficiency Advocates expressed support for revising the ESFM and 
ESCC definitions to include additional end-suction pumps. (Grundfos, 
No. 31 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-3)
    For the reasons discussed in the April 2022 NOPR and in the 
preceding paragraphs, DOE is including all end-suction pumps within the 
coverage of this test procedure by modifying the definitions of ESFM 
and ESCC pumps.
e. Line Shaft and Cantilever Pumps
    ANSI/HI Standard 14.1-14.2-2019, ``American National Standard for 
Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and Definitions'' (ANSI/HI 14.1-
14.2-2019'') includes design criteria for different pump 
configurations, and section 14.1.3.3.1.3 describes vertically separate 
discharge sump pumps, a category of pump that includes line shaft 
(``VS4'') pumps and cantilever (``VS5'') pumps. Both VS4 and VS5 pumps 
are vertically-suspended pumps with a single casing and with a 
discharge column that is separate from the shaft column. The pump 
equipment categories defined by DOE do not explicitly reference VS4 or 
VS5 pumps, and some pumps may be covered by both the DOE definition of 
an ESFM pump and the HI definition of a VS4 or VS5 pump. 86 FR 20075, 
20079.
    DOE addressed comments on the April 2021 RFI regarding these pumps 
in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21278. DOE discussed that some 
line shaft pumps may already be within the test procedure scope but are 
defined as ESFM pumps. Id. Additionally, DOE noted that cantilever 
pumps are primarily designed for non-clean water applications, 
including liquids and slurries containing large solids. Id. DOE did not 
propose to include line shaft or cantilever pumps in the test procedure 
scope in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21279.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the Efficiency Advocates 
further encouraged DOE to consider coverage for both cantilever and 
line shaft pumps, stating that some of these pumps have similar designs 
to ESFM and ESCC pumps and some are marketed for pumping clean water. 
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 3-4)
    DOE notes that most or all clean water line shaft and cantilever 
pumps are already covered by the ES definition. DOE does not believe 
there is a significant amount of clean water cantilever and line shaft 
pumps, as these pumps are primarily designed for non-clean water 
applications including liquids and slurries that contain large solids. 
As discussed, DOE is not expanding the scope to include non-clear water 
pumps.
4. Scope Limitations
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also proposed to remove bowl diameter 
limitations for certain pumps, include an additional nominal speed of 
1200 rpm, and decrease horsepower requirements for IL pumps. 87 FR 
21268, 21279. DOE also proposed to clarify pump design temperature 
range. Id. The following sections summarize each of these topics.
a. Submersible Turbine Pumps With Bowl Diameter Greater Than 6 Inches
    As discussed previously, the scope of the current DOE test 
procedure includes ST pumps with a bowl diameter of 6 inches or 
smaller. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i)(E) and (a)(1)(ii)(E).
    DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to include VT pumps within the 
scope of the DOE test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21279. DOE did not 
propose a bowl diameter limitation for VT pumps in the April 2022 NOPR. 
VT pumps are similar in design to ST pumps and commenters had indicated 
that the two pump categories can be used in overlapping applications. 
Id. Therefore, to maintain consistency across VT and ST pump 
categories, DOE also proposed to remove the 6-inch bowl diameter 
limitation for ST pumps. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the CA IOUs and the Efficiency 
Advocates supported including ST pumps with a bowl diameter greater 
than six inches. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 
at p. 3) The CA IOUs also provided supplemental data to support the 
inclusion of ST pumps with bowl diameters greater than six inches. (CA 
IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3-5, 7) They found that 21 percent of California 
wells, and 36 percent of Texas wells had an estimated nominal bowl size 
between eight and twelve inches. Id. at 5.
    China recommended that DOE retain the 6-inch maximum bowl diameter 
restriction for ST pumps to avoid the high cost of testing larger ST 
pumps. (China, No. 29 at p. 4)
    Grundfos stated that all of its products with bowl diameters 
greater than 6 inches would be excluded from the regulation due to the 
head limitation (i.e., less than or equal to 459 feet); however, it 
commented that increasing the maximum bowl diameter would have minimal 
impact on energy use and suggested that DOE instead evaluate how ST 
pumps with larger bowl diameters may be evaluated in a future 
rulemaking. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2)
    HI encouraged DOE to define how bowl size would be determined for a 
ST pump when the bowl diameter varies among stages. (HI, No. 33 at p. 
4) HI also stated that since DOE has proposed to expand the size of ST 
pumps and include all sizes of VT pumps, DOE should clarify that its 
scope is limited to a specific speed of 5,000 in U.S. customary units 
for these pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 1) Additionally, HI recommended that 
DOE update the text in 431.464 (a)(1)(iii)(E) as follows: For ST, VT, 
ESCC and ESFM pumps, a specific speed less than or equal to 5,000 when 
calculated using U.S. customary units. Id.
    In response to HI's comment on determining bowl size when bowl 
diameter varies between stages, DOE clarifies that where bowl diameter 
varies among stages, the minimum bowl diameter of a ST or VT pump would 
be considered the appropriate measurement.
    Based on additional evaluation and the feedback it received from 
stakeholders, DOE has determined that manufacturers of VT and ST pumps 
with bowl diameters larger then 6 inches would likely need to build new 
test stands to test these products using the DOE test procedure. DOE 
notes that because many VT and ST pumps with bowl diameters larger then 
6 inches are outside of the DOE test procedure scope because their head 
exceeds the

[[Page 17943]]

maximum set by DOE. Therefore, if DOE were to include these pumps in 
its test procedure, pump manufacturers would need to make substantial 
capital investments to test and certify a very small number of in-scope 
pumps. This would result in a test cost per basic model that is as much 
as 100 times higher than the estimates DOE presented in the April 2022 
NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21309. Test costs are discussed in more details in 
section III.K.1 of this document. Since test burden for VT and ST pump 
manufacturers would be very high relative to the number of pumps 
tested, DOE has determined that the potential benefits of including VT 
and ST pumps with bowl diameters larger than 6 inches within the scope 
of this test procedure are outweighed by the burdens associated with 
testing and certifying such products. Therefore, DOE is maintaining the 
6-inch bowl diameter limitation for ST pumps and specifying a maximum 
bowl diameter of 6 inches for VT pumps in this final rule.
b. Pumps Designed To Be Operated at 1,200 RPM
    As discussed, DOE limits the scope of pumps under the current test 
procedure to those designed to operate with a 2- or 4-pole induction 
motor, or a non-induction motor with an operating range that includes 
speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 rpm and/or 1,440 and 2,160 
rpm. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). In either case, the driver and 
impeller must rotate at the same speed. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). 
The current DOE test procedure does not include pumps designed to 
operate with 6-pole induction motors, or with non-induction motors that 
have a speed-of-rotation operating range exclusively outside the ranges 
defined.
    Based on a review of pump performance curves available online, DOE 
found that unregulated pumps tested with a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm 
are often part of the same pump families as those pumps that currently 
fall within the scope of the DOE test procedure.\16\ 87 FR 21268, 
21279. To ensure equitable treatment among these pumps, DOE proposed in 
the April 2022 NOPR to extend the scope of this test procedure to cover 
pumps designed to operate with 6-pole induction motors, and pumps 
designed to operate with non-induction motors with an operating range 
that includes speeds of rotation between 960 rpm and 1,440 rpm.\17\ Id. 
DOE proposed test provisions to accommodate these pumps in the April 
2022 NOPR and requested comment on its proposal. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032-0024. 
(Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032-0024.)
    \17\ 960 and 1440 rpm are 20 percent of 1,200 rpm. 
The acceptable non-induction motor ranges for 1800 and 3600 rpm 
pumps are also 20 percent of the nominal value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the CA IOUs and the Efficiency 
Advocates supported DOE including 6-pole motors. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 
3; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 3) The CA IOUs stated that 6-pole 
clean water pumps often have operating ranges that compete with 4-pole 
pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) Grundfos agreed that 6[hyphen]pole 
pumps should be considered but questioned whether doing so would 
achieve the energy savings that DOE anticipates, and observed that 6-
pole pumps have much smaller sales numbers compared to less expensive 
4[hyphen]pole pumps for a similar duty point. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 
5).
    After review of stakeholder feedback, and for the reasons discussed 
above, DOE is extending the scope of this test procedure to cover pumps 
designed to operate with 6-pole induction motors. DOE may evaluate 
potential energy savings for these pumps in a future energy 
conservation standard.
    In terms of operating range, Grundfos urged DOE to ensure that the 
operating ranges for 6-pole and 4-pole pumps designed to operate with 
non-induction motors are independent from each other. Grundfos 
additionally recommended setting the maximum operating range for 
6[hyphen]pole pumps designed to operate with non-induction motors at 
1,439 rpm since the lower end of the operating range is 1,440 rpm for 
4[hyphen]pole pumps designed to operate with non-induction motors. 
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2, 5) Similarly, HI recommended that DOE change 
the maximum operating speed for 6-pole pumps designed to operate with 
non-induction motors from 1,440 rpm to 1,439 rpm to provide a clear 
delineation between the operating range for 4-pole pumps designed to 
operate with non-induction motors (i.e., 1,440 rpm to 2,160 rpm). (HI, 
No. 33 at p. 5)
    DOE agrees that the operating ranges for 2-, 4-, and 6-pole pumps 
designed to operate with a non-induction motor should be separate from 
each other and not overlap. In consideration of stakeholder feedback, 
DOE is modifying the maximum operating speed for a 6-pole pump designed 
to operate with a non-induction motor from 960 rpm to 1,400 rpm as 
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to greater than or equal to 960 rpm and 
less than 1,440 rpm. In summary, in this final rule, DOE is including 
clean water pumps designed to operate with a 6-pole induction motor or 
a non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating range greater 
than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm.
    Grundfos also commented that adding the 6[hyphen]pole speed 
highlights a point of unnecessary testing burden around the defined 
``operating ranges'' with respect to variable speed equipment. 
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2) According to Grundfos, a variable speed 
product with a motor designed for 4,000 rpm can technically operate at 
speeds across all three defined ``ranges,'' and current regulations 
require testing at all three nominal speeds. Id. However, Grundfos 
stated that a product with a 4,000 rpm design speed will likely perform 
only in a single operating range defined by DOE. Id. Grundfos asserted 
that consumers are more likely to purchase a less expensive pump with a 
smaller horsepower range than run a 4,000 rpm pump at 1,800 rpm. Id. 
Therefore, Grundfos recommended the DOE consider updating its language 
to state that variable load equipment should be tested at the nominal 
speed nearest the speed identified on the pump nameplate. Id.
    DOE notes that section I.C.1 in appendix A specifies how to 
determine the nominal speed of rotation for testing. For instance, for 
pumps sold with 4-pole induction motors, the nominal speed of rotation 
shall be 1,800 rpm. (See section I.C.1.2) For 4-pole pumps designed for 
use with non-induction motors where the operating range of the pump and 
motor includes speeds of rotation between 1,440 rpm and 2,160 rpm, the 
nominal speed for test would be 1,800 rpm. (See section I.C.1.5) 
Whether the pump is sold with variable speed capability is immaterial, 
as the determination of nominal test speed is based solely on where the 
pump is designed to operate. DOE notes that, to determine the range of 
speeds that a pump is designed to operate within, DOE would refer to 
published data, marketing literature, and other publicly available 
information. This would include the pump nameplate. If the range of 
speeds a pump is designed to operate within crosses two or more 
categories, manufacturers must test and certify at each relevant 
nominal speed.
c. Pump Horsepower and Design Speed
    As previously discussed, the current test procedure includes only 
ESFM, ESCC, IL, RSV, and ST pumps, each of which is limited by its 
respective definition to those with shaft input power greater than or 
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and

[[Page 17944]]

full impeller diameter. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i); 10 CFR 431.462.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed comments that some pumps sold 
with electronically commutated motors (``ECMs'') and intended to run at 
higher speeds, such as 4,320 rpm, must be normalized to rate at 3,600 
rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21279-21280. This adjustment causes the power of the 
motor to fall below 1 hp, meaning the pump is therefore out of scope. 
Id. As stated previously, the pump definitions reference horsepower 
limitations based on shaft input power at BEP and full impeller 
diameter. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE defines ``BEP'' as the pump hydraulic 
power operating point (consisting of both flow and head conditions) 
that results in maximum efficiency, and defines ``full impeller 
diameter'' as the maximum impeller diameter with which a given pump 
basic model is distributed in commerce. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE's test 
procedure for pumps at appendix A also includes test provisions for 
determining both BEP and pump input power (also known as shaft input 
power), as well as provisions for normalizing all measured data to the 
specified nominal speed of rotation. As such, while the definitions 
themselves do not specify that shaft input power is determined at 
nominal speed, DOE understands that the pump definitions could be 
interpreted to exclude pumps with shaft input power greater than or 
equal to 1 HP at BEP at their design speed, but less than 1 HP when 
tested and corrected to nominal speed. In addition, DOE understands 
that the value of maximum efficiency varies little with speed, and is 
often assumed to be constant, and as such the definition of BEP alone 
would not be sufficient to assume that it must be determined at a 
certain speed different from that in the test procedure.
    However, DOE also notes that it is expanding the current test 
procedure scope to include SVIL pumps, which will address this issue. 
Specifically, SVIL pumps are fractional horsepower pumps, so even when 
corrected to nominal speed, the pumps in question would be included in 
scope. DOE understands that use of high frequency (i.e., 4,000 rpm) 
ECMs is likely more prevalent on SVILs than on other pumps in this 
horsepower range, particularly as a result of their applications and 
competition with the circulator market. This means that including SVILs 
in this test procedure includes most, if not all, pumps where motor 
power decreases below 1 hp when rated at BEP. For these reasons, DOE 
did not propose to change the specified horsepower limitations within 
the pump category definitions in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 
21280.
    DOE requested comment on its tentative determination that including 
SVILs in the test procedure scope will largely eliminate the issue of 
higher speed 1 hp pumps falling out of scope when they rate at a 
nominal speed of 3,600 rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21273. Grundfos and HI both 
agreed with DOE's determination. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3; HI, No. 33 
at p. 3)
    For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs and in the 
April 2022 NOPR, DOE is maintaining the 1 hp limitations in the ESFM, 
ESFC, IL, RSV, and ST pump definitions, and is including the 1 hp 
limitation in its definitions for RSH, and VT pumps.
d. Pumps Over 200 HP
    As previously discussed, the current test procedure includes only 
ESFM, ESCC, IL, RSV, and ST pumps. Each of these classes is limited by 
its respective definition to those pumps with shaft input power greater 
than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full 
impeller diameter. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i); 10 CFR 431.462.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the Efficiency Advocates 
encouraged DOE to expand the test procedure scope to include pumps 
greater than 200 hp, and stated that motors between 201 and 500 hp are 
the most consumptive motor size group in industrial electricity 
consumption. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 32 at p. 3) The Efficiency 
Advocates further commented that the current calculation methods and 
DOE's proposal to allow alternative efficiency determination methods 
(AEDMs) in lieu of physical testing would help mitigate test burden 
associated with these larger pumps. Id.
    DOE notes in response that pumps with shaft input powers over 200 
hp generally require larger, more expensive, test stands and testing 
facilities. Additionally, these pumps are often ``engineered-to-
order'', resulting in many different basic models. These two factors 
would lead to significantly higher per- model test costs than for pumps 
with shaft input powers below 200 hp. AEDMs and the calculation methods 
in the DOE test procedure for pumps may alleviate some testing burden, 
but neither completely negate the need for physical testing of bare 
pumps which drives the higher testing burden above 200 hp. At this 
time, DOE has determined that expanding the pumps test procedure to 
include pumps with shaft powers greater than 200 hp would be too 
burdensome to pump manufacturers. DOE may re-evaluate this decision in 
a future rulemaking.
e. Horsepower and Number of Stages for Testing
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed how to handle certification 
of equipment when some models are regulated, and others are not. 87 FR 
21268, 21280. DOE provided an example of an RSV basic model sold with a 
1 hp motor tested at 3 stages, which is in scope, and an RSV model that 
is 2-stage with a 0.75 hp motor. Id. Since the latter pump uses a 0.75 
hp motor, it is partially out of scope. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated it understands that the same 
model of RSV pump may be sold with two stages, three stages, or some 
other number of stages. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE's RSV pump definition 
includes those pumps that have a shaft input power greater than or 
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller 
diameter and at the number of stages required for testing. 10 CFR 
431.462. DOE's testing provisions for RSV pumps in section C.2 of 
appendix A specify that the number of stages required for testing is 
three, or, if the basic model is only available with fewer than three 
stages, the basic model is tested with the maximum number of stages 
with which it is distributed in commerce in the United States. 
Therefore, in the previous example, the RSV pump model sold with 2 or 3 
stages would be included in the scope of the test procedure (and 
standards) if it had a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp 
when tested at 3 stages, and the resulting PEI would apply to all 
stages with which the pump model is sold. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE did 
not propose to modify this language in the April 2022 NOPR. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos stated that it 
disagrees with DOE's interpretation of the regulation. (Grundfos, No. 
31 at p. 11) Grundfos explained that the definition for a basic model 
states that a manufacturer cannot group equipment using DOE-regulated 
motors with equipment using motors under 1 hp, and therefore, the 
manufacturer would have two basic models, one with pumps at 1 to 200 hp 
and a second for pumps under 1 hp. Id. Grundfos added that the second 
basic model would not be in scope since RSV pumps with motors under 1 
hp are not included in the test procedure scope. Id. Additionally, 
Grundfos commented that the same equipment sold as a bare pump would be 
considered a single basic model regardless of the number of stages and 
shaft power. Id.
    DOE notes that the basic model definition in 10 CFR 431.462 states 
that all variations in the number of stages of

[[Page 17945]]

bare RSV and ST pumps must be considered a single basic model. The 
definition also states that for pumps sold with different motors, the 
motors must be in the same motor efficiency band to be considered a 
single basic model, referencing Table 3 in appendix A. However, Table 3 
does not provide motor efficiencies for fractional horsepower motors. 
Additionally, section I.C.2 of appendix A specifies the number of 
stages for testing RSV and ST pumps. DOE acknowledges that this leaves 
multi-stage pumps sold with fractional horsepower motors out of scope 
of this test procedure, whereas equivalent pumps that include the 
specified number of stages for testing are included within scope of 
this test procedure. This distinction applies only for pumps sold with 
motors and does not affect bare pumps, in which DOE's original 
interpretation still stands.
f. Design Temperature Range
    The current scope for the pumps test procedure is limited to pumps 
with a design temperature range between and including 14 to 248 [deg]F. 
This range was derived from the original negotiation term sheet for 
pumps, which recommended limiting the scope to pumps with a design 
range from -10 [deg]C to 120 [deg]C. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-NOC-0039-
0092). For the purposes of its regulations, DOE translated this range 
to Fahrenheit. DOE has received inquires as to whether a pump marketed 
for temperatures up to 250 [deg]F is outside of the current test 
procedure's scope. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated it reviewed 
marketing materials for a number of pumps and found that common upper 
limits of temperature are 212, 225, 248, 250, and 300 [deg]F. 87 FR 
21268, 21280. Some marketing materials stated that standard seals may 
have one high temperature limit while optional seals provide a higher 
limit (typically 250 or 300 [deg]F). Id. DOE noted it understood that 
the original intent of the scope limitation was to exclude pumps 
designed exclusively for low or high temperatures from the test 
procedure. Id. However, if a manufacturer is offering a pump model 
across all temperature ranges to minimize SKUs, rather than offering 
separate low temperature and high temperature models, such a pump model 
should be subject to the regulations. Id. DOE explained that only pumps 
designed and marketed for temperatures exclusively outside the range of 
DOE's scope would be excluded from the test procedure and energy 
conservation standards. Id.
    DOE also discussed that rounding to a temperature limit of 250 
[deg]F when translating from [deg]C to [deg]F would be preferable to 
using the exact value of 248 [deg]F since manufacturers commonly use 
rounded temperature values in their marketing materials. Id. Similarly, 
DOE discussed that it would be preferable to round the lower 
temperature limit from 14 [deg]F to 15 [deg]F. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify its design 
temperature limits to include equipment that is designed for operation 
at temperatures that fall into any part of the range from 15 to 250 
[deg]F. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE requested comment on this clarification 
and on DOE's recommendation to shift the design temperature range from 
14 [deg]F to 248 [deg]F to 15 [deg]F to 250 [deg]F. Id.
    In response, Grundfos agreed with DOE's intention to clarify the 
temperature ranges. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3) HI stated that it does 
not expect the temperature adjustment to have a significant impact (HI, 
No. 33 at p. 3)
    For the reasons discussed previously, DOE is finalizing its 
proposed clarifications to the design temperature range which includes 
pumps with a design temperature inclusive of any part of the range from 
15 [deg]F to 250 [deg]F.

B. Definitions

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed removing certain references 
to volute in pump definitions and HI pump class references. 87 FR 
21268, 21281. DOE also proposed new definitions for bowl diameter, 
SVILs, BB, VT, RSH, RSHIL, and RSHES pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21281-21283. 
Further, DOE considered updating the definitions for close-coupled and 
mechanically-coupled pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21283-21284.
    DOE received one general comment in response to the definitions 
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. China suggested that DOE add 
corresponding schematic diagrams to textual definitions. (China, No. 29 
at p. 3)
    DOE understands that diagrams can help provide context and notes 
that its current test procedure references ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2 and ANSI/HI 
2.1/2.2, which includes pump schematics. However, DOE has found that 
schematics may result in greater confusion, since schematics provide a 
specific example design but may not apply to other designs. For 
instance, a diagram may suggest scope restrictions (or expansions) that 
are not consistent with the definition language. Therefore, DOE is not 
including schematics or diagrams in addition to its textual 
definitions.
1. Removing Certain References to Volute
    As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, pumps generally have one of 
two common discharge types, either a volute or a diffuser. 87 FR 21268, 
21281. A volute is made up of one or two scroll-shaped channels, 
whereas a diffuser has three or more passages that diffuse the liquid 
that is being pumped. Id. The current definitions for end-suction and 
in-line pumps use only the term ``volute'' when, in practice, either 
volutes or diffusers may be used for these pump categories. For 
example, DOE's current definition for end-suction pump specifies that 
the liquid is discharged through a volute in a plane perpendicular to 
the shaft, while the definition for ESCC pump, which is an end-suction 
pump, specifically references OH7 \18\ pumps. 10 CFR 431.462. However, 
Table 14.1.3.7 of HI 14.1-14.2-2019 specifies a diffuser as the 
standard casing for OH7 pumps. Similarly, DOE's current definition for 
IL pump states that the liquid is discharged through a volute in a 
plane perpendicular to the shaft, and specifically references OH4 and 
OH5 pumps as examples of end-suction pumps. Id. In contrast, Table 
14.1.3.7 of HI 14.1-14.2-2019 specifies a diffuser as the standard 
casing for OH4 and OH5 pumps. DOE noted in the April 2022 NOPR that HI 
1.1-1.2-2014 did not make these casing distinctions. 87 FR 21268, 
21281.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ OH5 and OH7 pumps are defined as close-coupled pumps in 
ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. OH4 pumps are defined as rigidly-coupled/
short-coupled pumps in ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE interprets the term ``volute'' in its definitions for ``end-
suction pump'' and ``in-line pump'' to mean the part of the pump casing 
through which liquid is discharged generally, rather than to reference 
a specific type of discharge. To avoid this unintentional inconsistency 
between DOE's terminology and the terminology used by the updated 
industry standard, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to amend the 
definitions of in-line pump and end-suction pump to remove the 
distinction that liquid is discharged ``through a volute in a plane 
perpendicular to the shaft'' [emphasis added] by specifying instead 
that liquid is discharged ``in a plane perpendicular to the shaft.'' 
Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI, Grundfos, and China stated 
they support the volute clarification. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3; China, No. 
29 at p. 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3)
    For the reasons discussed, DOE is adopting the amended definitions 
for

[[Page 17946]]

end-suction and in-line pumps as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. HI Pump Class References
    The current DOE definitions for ESCC pump, ESFM pump, IL pump, RSV 
pump, and ST pump all include references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 or 
ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 pump configurations as examples of pumps that 
would meet the given definition. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed 
to remove references to specific pump configurations as defined in 
ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 in the definitions for 
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps since DOE and HI terminology are not 
wholly consistent. 87 FR 21268, 21281.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos stated it agrees with 
the proposal to remove the reference to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 in DOE's 
definitions for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at 
p. 3) In its comments, HI recommended replacing references to ANSI/HI 
1.1-1.2 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2 with the updated ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, 
which superseded ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2. (HI, No. 33 at p. 
4) HI further explained that these references are used as the industry 
standard and will provide clarity to the market. Id.
    DOE notes that its definitional language must be clear and 
consistent on its own without the support of diagrams or schematics, as 
application of additional diagrams or schematics may confuse the intent 
of a given definition. To establish self-contained definitions, DOE is 
removing the references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-
2014 in the ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV and ST pump definitions, as proposed in 
the April 2022 NOPR. DOE has determined that the definitions without 
references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 provide 
sufficient specificity to clearly define the various pump categories.
3. Bowl Diameter
    The current DOE definition for ``bowl diameter'' references the 
definition of ``intermediate bowl'' in ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. This 
mention is the sole remaining reference to ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 in the 
test procedure, since DOE is eliminating the HI pump class references 
to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. In the April 2022 
NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that a self-contained definition for 
bowl diameter is clearer. 87 FR 21268, 21281. To disassociate the 
definition of ``bowl diameter'' from ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014, DOE proposed 
in the April 2022 NOPR to define ``bowl diameter'' as ``the maximum 
dimension of an imaginary straight line passing through, and in the 
plane of, the circular shape of the intermediate bowl of the bare pump 
that is perpendicular to the pump shaft and that intersects the 
outermost circular shape of the intermediate bowl of the bare pump at 
both of its ends.'' Id. With respect to ``intermediate bowl,'' DOE 
proposed to define this term as ``the enclosure within which the 
impeller rotates and which serves as a guide for the flow from one 
impeller to the next.'' Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, both HI and Grundfos encouraged 
DOE to also update the definition of ``intermediate bowl'' to be 
``bowl'' as defined in ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4; 
Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3)
    Considering comments received, DOE is adopting a definition for 
``bowl'' rather than ``intermediate bowl.'' DOE is defining bowl in 10 
CFR 431.462 to mean a casing in which the impeller rotates, and that 
directs flow axially to the next stage or the discharge column. This 
definition is consistent with the definition for ``bowl'' in ANSI/HI 
14.1-14.2-2019. In this final rule, DOE is modifying the definition for 
bowl diameter proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to refer to ``bowl'' 
instead of ``intermediate bowl''.
4. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
    DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to expand the scope of the test 
procedure to include SVIL pumps, which are identical to IL pumps except 
for having a shaft input power less 1 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21282. The 
Circulator Pump Working Group recommended that SVIL pumps be defined as 
a single stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that: (1) 
has a shaft input power less than 1 hp at the best efficiency point at 
full impeller diameter, (2) is distributed in commerce with a motor 
that does not have to be in a horizontal position to function as 
designed, and (3) discharges the pumped liquid through a volute in a 
plane perpendicular to the shaft. (Docket No. EERE-2016-BT-STD-0004, 
No. 58 Recommendations #3C at p. 3)
    The recommended definition would distinguish SVIL pumps from DOE's 
current IL pump definition \19\ in that SVIL pumps have a reduced shaft 
power input range \20\ and a different maximum pump power output 
limitation.\21\ The change to shaft input power is the primary 
distinction between IL and SVIL pumps. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE 
tentatively determined this distinction would be necessary to 
adequately separate the two categories. 87 FR 21268, 21282. The pump 
power output is a consequence of the shaft power limitations. Id. DOE 
tentatively determined that SVIL pumps do not require a 5 hp pump power 
output limitation, as their shaft input power is already capped below 1 
hp. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ An ``in-line (IL) pump'' means a pump that is either a 
twin-head pump or a single-stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, 
rotodynamic pump that has a shaft input power greater than or equal 
to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller 
diameter, in which liquid is discharged through a volute in a plane 
perpendicular to the shaft. Such pumps do not include pumps that are 
mechanically-coupled or close-coupled, have a pump power output that 
is less than or equal to 5 hp at BEP at full impeller diameter, and 
are distributed in commerce with a horizontal motor.
    \20\ IL pumps are constrained to greater than or equal to 1 hp 
and less than or equal to 200 hp, whereas SVIL pumps must be less 
than 1 hp.
    \21\ IL pumps have a limit of 5 hp at BEP, whereas SVIL pumps 
have no hp limitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE noted that another difference is that 
the IL definition includes a group of three parameters to exclude 
circulator pumps--namely that they are either mechanically-coupled or 
close-coupled, have a pump power output that is less than or equal to 5 
hp at BEP at full impeller diameter, and are distributed in commerce 
with a horizontal motor. 87 FR 21268, 21282. In contrast, the 
recommended SVIL definition is meant to exclude circulator pumps 
through clause (2) (i.e., ``related to distribution in commerce with a 
motor that does not have to be in a horizontal position to function as 
designed''). Id. On September 9, 2022, DOE published a test procedure 
final rule for circulator pumps (``Circulator Pumps TP Final Rule''). 
87 FR 57264. In the Circulator Pumps TP Final Rule, DOE defined a 
circulator pump as consisting of a wet-rotor circulator pump; dry 
rotor, two-piece circulator pump; or dry rotor, three-piece circulator 
pumps 87 FR 57264, 57269. The Circulator Pumps TP Final Rule also 
defined these subcategories of circulator pumps. Id. In the April 2022 
NOPR, DOE proposed that for the SVIL definition, rather than including 
the recommendation in clause (2), to instead exclude circulator pumps. 
87 FR 21268, 21282. For consistency, DOE also proposed to revise the IL 
pump definition to explicitly exclude circulator pumps instead of 
including the clauses meant to implicitly exclude them. Id.
    DOE notes that clause (3) of the SVIL definition recommended in the 
April 2022 NOPR refers to a volute. For the reasons discussed in 
section III.B.1 of

[[Page 17947]]

this document, DOE is excluding this reference from the SVIL 
definition.
    The recommended SVIL pump definition also requires that these pumps 
be distributed into commerce with a motor, meaning SVIL pumps cannot be 
sold as bare pumps. In the April 2022 NOPR, based on a literature 
search, DOE tentatively determined that all SVIL pumps are sold with a 
motor. 87 FR 21268, 21282. However, by proposing to replace clause (2) 
with an exclusion for circulator pumps, this requirement would be 
eliminated. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed that, although not addressed 
in the recommendation from the Circulating Pump Working Group, the 
defined term ``twin-head pump'' (10 CFR 431.462) would be applicable to 
SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21282. Specifically, in the January 2016 Final 
Rule, DOE adopted a test procedure for ``twin-head pumps'', where a 
twin-head pump is defined as a ``dry rotor, single-axis flow, 
rotodynamic pump that contains two impeller assemblies, which both 
share a common casing, inlet, and discharge, and each of which (1) 
Contains an impeller, impeller shaft (or motor shaft in the case of 
close-coupled pumps), shaft seal or packing, driver (if present), and 
mechanical equipment (if present); (2) Has a shaft input power that is 
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at best 
efficiency point (BEP) and full impeller diameter; (3) Has the same 
primary energy source (if sold with a driver) and the same electrical, 
physical, and functional characteristics that affect energy consumption 
or energy efficiency; (4) Is mounted in its own volute; and (5) 
Discharges liquid through its volute and the common discharge in a 
plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.'' 81 FR 4086, 4115-4117, 
4147.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to define SVIL pumps based on 
the recommended definition from the Circulator Pump Working Group, with 
modifications to include SVILs that are small vertical twin-head pumps, 
to exclude pumps that are circulator pumps, and to remove the current 
reference to a volute. 87 FR 21268, 21282. Specifically, DOE proposed 
to define a ``small vertical in-line pump'' as a small vertical twin-
head pump or a single stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic 
pump that (1) has a shaft input power less than 1 hp at the best 
efficiency point at full impeller diameter, (2) in which liquid is 
discharged in a plane perpendicular to the shaft; and (3) is not a 
circulator pump. Id.
    Since SVIL pumps are similar to IL pumps but operate at a lower 
horsepower, and also are available in twin-head configurations, DOE 
also proposed to define ``small vertical twin-head pump'' in the April 
2022 NOPR and to extend the twin-head pump test procedure adopted in 
the January 2016 Final Rule to small vertical twin-head pumps. 87 FR 
21268, 21273.
    DOE requested comment on its proposed revision to the IL definition 
to explicitly exclude circulator pumps. Both Grundfos and HI agreed 
that DOE should revise the IL definition to explicitly exclude 
circulator pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4) DOE is 
adopting the definition for IL pumps as proposed in the April 2022 
NOPR.
    DOE also requested comment on the definitions for ``small vertical 
in-line pump'' and ``small vertical twin-head pump.'' DOE also 
requested comment on the percentage of SVIL pumps, if any, that are not 
sold with a motor, and whether the definition of SVIL pumps should be 
limited to those sold with a motor.
    China requested that DOE provide additional clarity on the number 
of motor phases used in SVILs under 0.25 hp. (China, No. 29 at p. 4) 
China also commented that the definition for SVILs contains ``with 
bearings on both ends of the rotating assembly'' while common IL pumps 
on the market do not have bearings at both ends (China, No. 29 at p. 
3).
    HI commented that including SVILs in the pumps test procedure will 
ensure consistency between IL and SVIL pumps and that SVIL pumps should 
not be treated differently from IL pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3, 4).
    Regarding China's comment on motor phases for SVILs under 0.25 hp, 
DOE clarifies that the SVIL definition does not, nor does any aspect of 
the DOE test procedure, limit the number of phases of an SVIL motor 
below 0.25 hp. In response to China's question about bearings in the 
SVIL definition, DOE notes that the SVIL definition does not include 
``with bearings on both ends of the rotating assembly'' and that the 
text China referenced is from the proposed definition of BB pumps in 
the April 2022 NOPR.
    In response to DOE's proposed definition for small vertical twin-
head pumps, Grundfos suggested that DOE revise the term ``twin head 
pump'' to ``in[hyphen]line twin[hyphen]head pump'' to minimize 
confusion with the small vertical twin-head pump definition. (Grundfos, 
No. 31 at p. 3) Additionally, Grundfos stated that ``Twin Head Pump'' 
is not consistent with the use of ``twin[hyphen]head'' within the IL 
definition and needs a hyphen. Id. HI suggested that DOE clarify if 
both the volute discharge and common discharge must meet the ``plane 
perpendicular to the impeller shaft'' requirement in the small vertical 
twin-head pump definition. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
    After consideration, DOE has determined that the twin-head and 
small vertical twin-head pump definitions are distinct and specific 
enough to avoid confusion. In response to HI's comment, DOE clarifies 
that only the common discharge of a twin-head and small vertical twin-
head pump have to be in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.
    Regarding the percentage of SVILs that are sold with a motor, HI 
stated that it does not collect data on SVILs sold without motors and 
recommends asking manufacturers for this information during interviews. 
(HI, No. 33 at p. 4) While Grundfos commented that it sells a very 
small number of SVILs without a motor, it stated that SVILs sold 
without a motor should not be excluded. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
    In this final rule, DOE is adopting the SVIL definition proposed in 
the April 2022 NOPR, with the following revision: DOE has added a 
hyphen to the small vertical twin-head pump term to be consistent with 
the twin-head pump term.
5. Between-Bearing Pumps
    As discussed in section III.A.3.a of the April 2022 NOPR, DOE 
proposed to add between-bearing pumps to the scope of its test 
procedure and therefore proposed a definition for this pump category. 
87 FR 21268, 21282.
    ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 defines between-bearing pump as a 
rotodynamic pump with the impeller(s) mounted on a shaft between 
bearings on either end. In addition, all between-bearing pumps 
described in ANSI/HI 14.1-14-2-2019 are mechanically-coupled and dry 
rotor. Based on a literature review, DOE tentatively determined in the 
April 2022 NOPR that the between-bearing pumps that are most similar to 
the pumps currently regulated by DOE have axially-split casings and 1 
or 2 stages. 87 FR 21268, 21282. Accordingly, using ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-
2019 as the basis for its approach, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR 
to use the defined terms ``dry rotor pump,'' ``rotodynamic pump,'' and 
``mechanically-coupled pump'' to define a between-bearing pump, i.e., 
``an axially-split, mechanically-coupled, one- or two-stage, dry rotor, 
rotodynamic pump with bearings on both ends of the rotating assembly 
that has a shaft input power

[[Page 17948]]

greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP 
and full impeller diameter and at the number of stages required for 
testing.'' 87 FR 21268, 218221282-21283.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos agreed with DOE's 
proposed definition for BB pumps and stated that the definition is 
sufficient to identify the intended scope. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4) 
HI recommended amending the definition to be consistent with the 
definition for BB1 in ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019.\22\ (HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 defines BB1 Pumps as one and two 
stage axially split casing pumps that are generally characterized by 
the following attributes: (1) pump and drive have separate shafts; 
(2) the pump has two integral bearing housings to absorb all pump 
axial and radial pump hydraulic loads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed, DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of 
this test procedure; therefore, DOE is not adopting the proposed 
definition for BB pumps.
    DOE also proposed to define ``axially-split pump,'' a term 
associated with BB pumps, in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21283. 
The term ``axially-split'' refers to a pump casing that can be 
separated, for maintenance and assembly, in a plane parallel to the 
impeller shaft. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to define an 
``axially-split pump'' as ``a pump with a casing that can be separated 
or split in a plane that is parallel to and which contains the axis of 
the impeller shaft.'' Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI and Grundfos supported DOE's 
proposed definitions for axially-split pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 
4; HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
    Again, since DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of this 
test procedure, DOE is not adopting the proposed definition for 
axially-split pumps.
6. Vertical Turbine Pump
    As discussed in section III.A.3.b, DOE is adding vertical turbine 
pumps to the scope of its test procedure and proposed a definition for 
vertical turbine pumps in the April 2022 NOPR. ANSI/HI 14.2-14.2-2019 
defines vertical turbine pumps as ``single-casing, non-submersible 
pumps with impellers mounted in a vertically suspended shaft, that 
discharge liquid through the column.'' Using this definition as a 
basis, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to define ``vertical turbine 
pump'' as a vertically-suspended, single-stage or multi-stage, dry 
rotor, rotodynamic pump (1) That has a shaft input power greater than 
or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full 
impeller diameter and at the number of stages required for testing; (2) 
For which no external part of such a pump is designed to be submerged 
in the pumped liquid; (3) That has a single pressure containing 
boundary (i.e., is single casing), which may consist of but is not 
limited to bowls, columns, and discharge heads; and (4) That discharges 
liquid through the same casing in which the impeller shaft is 
contained. 87 FR 21268, 21283.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, both HI and Grundfos 
recommended that DOE update the definition for vertical turbine pumps. 
(HI, No. 33 at p. 1, 2 and 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4) Specifically, 
HI and Grundfos mentioned that clause 2 of DOE's definition, which 
states ``no external part of such a pump is designed to be submerged in 
the pumped liquid,'' would exclude all vertical turbine pumps because 
their typical bowl assembly is submerged. Id. HI also explained that, 
within the pumps industry, vertical turbine pumps are understood to be 
VS1 and V3 types and do not include VS2 \23\ pumps. Id. HI therefore 
recommended that DOE reference ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. (HI, No. 33 at 
p. 5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ VS1, VS2, and VS3 pumps are vertically suspended impeller 
type pumps that discharge through a column. VS1 pumps have a 
diffuser, VS2 pumps use a volute, and VS3 pumps have axial flow. 
They are defined further in section 1.3.3.1.2 of ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Grundfos suggested that DOE exclude VS2 pumps and change the term 
from ``vertical turbine pumps'' to ``vertical turbine, bowl assembly'' 
to avoid confusion (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4). Additionally, Grundfos 
commented that DOE should add a definition for ``bowl assembly'' and 
directly reference section 14.1.7.6 of ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2. Id. Finally, 
Grundfos recommended that DOE use the term `bowl assembly' rather than 
`pump', since `pump' implies that losses for column, line shaft 
discharge head, etc. would be included. Id.
    After further evaluation and considering the comments received, DOE 
has concluded that the definition for vertical turbine pumps proposed 
in the April 2022 NOPR would exclude all vertical turbine pumps since 
all or part of the bowl assembly is designed to be submerged in the 
pumped fluid. This was not DOE's intent; therefore, DOE is adopting a 
revised definition for vertical turbine pump that excludes only pumps 
with the driver submerged in the pump liquid. This allows the bowl 
assembly of vertical turbine pumps to be submerged in the pumped 
liquid, but still differentiates vertical turbine pumps from 
submersible turbine pumps. In response to comments from HI and Grundfos 
about referencing ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, DOE has determined not to 
reference ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 in the definition for vertical turbine 
pumps. This determination is discussed in detail in section III.C.1. of 
this document. DOE has determined that the adopted definitions in this 
final rule are sufficiently specific and detailed to stand on their own 
without reference to industry definitions.
7. Radially-Split, Multi-Stage Horizontal Pumps
    As discussed in section III.A.3.c, DOE is including RSH pumps with 
both end-suction and in-line flow configurations in the scope of the 
DOE test procedure. RSH pumps are nearly identical to RSV pumps except 
for the mounting orientation and flow configurations. As discussed in 
section III.A.3.c, RSH pumps may have different flow configurations 
that are expected to impact pump efficiency; therefore, in the April 
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed three definitions for RSH pumps based on the 
existing DOE definition for RSV pumps: one for an overarching category 
of RSH pumps, which does not characterize flow; one for in-line RHS 
pumps (``RHSIL''); and one for end-suction RSH pumps (``RSHESS). 10 CFR 
431.462; 87 FR 21268, 21283.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, both HI and Grundfos supported 
DOE's proposed definitions for RSH, RSHIL, and RSHES pumps. (Grundfos, 
No. 31 at p. 5; HI, No. 33 at p. 5) However, Grundfos commented that 
the RSH definitions are quite broad and will likely capture multiple 
different pump products under the RSHES definition. (Grundfos, No. 31 
at p. 2) Grundfos requested that DOE clarify which pumps meet this 
definition and whether these pumps should be considered as a single 
pump category. Id.
    DOE has determined that additional pump category definitions within 
the RSH definitions are not necessary for the purposes of testing. DOE 
interprets that the concerns shared by Grundfos are based on 
differences in hydraulic performance between different RSH pumps. DOE 
notes that should it find notable hydraulic performance differences 
between RSH, RSHES, and RSHIL pumps, DOE would consider these 
differences and define separate equipment classes accordingly for any 
future energy conservation standards rulemaking.
    In this final rule, DOE is adopting the definitions for RHS, RHSES, 
and RHSILs as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.

[[Page 17949]]

8. Close-Coupled and Mechanically-Coupled Pumps
    DOE defines a close-coupled pump as a pump having a motor shaft 
that also acts as the impeller shaft. See 10 CFR 431.462. DOE defines a 
mechanically-coupled pump as a pump that has its own impeller shaft and 
bearings separate from the motor shaft. See 10 CFR 431.462. In the 
April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed how its definitions for close-coupled 
and mechanically-coupled pumps did not account for end suction pumps 
that do not have bearings separate from the motor and do not have the 
impellers mounted on the motor shaft. 87 FR 21268, 21283. In the April 
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed revisions to the definitions for close-coupled 
and mechanically-coupled pumps to eliminate this gap. Id. DOE proposed 
that (1) A close-coupled pump means a pump in which the driver's 
bearings absorb the pump's axial load; and (2) A mechanically-coupled 
pump means a pump in which bearings external to the driver absorb the 
pump's axial load. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI recognized DOE's effort to 
clarify the definitions for ESFM and ESCC pumps but provided the 
following recommendations to further improve clarity: (1) A close-
coupled pump means a pump in which radial and axial loads are primarily 
supported by the driver; and (2) A mechanically-coupled pump means a 
pump in which radial and axial loads are primarily supported external 
to the driver. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5)
    Grundfos commented that the proposed revisions to the ESFM and ESCC 
definitions will create additional burden for manufacturers that must 
reclassify products accordingly. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5)
    DOE interprets HI's comment to indicate that the definitions for 
close-coupled and mechanically-coupled proposed in the April 2022 NOPR 
did not leave enough flexibility for pumps where most, but not all, of 
a pump's axial load is supported by either bearings external to the 
driver or by the driver. DOE acknowledges that some flexibility is 
important when defining close-coupled and mechanically-coupled to avoid 
excluding any end suction pumps. However, DOE notes that the 
definitions recommended by HI are vague, specifically the term 
``primarily'' which leaves the suggested definition open to 
interpretation. In an effort to add flexibility to the definitions 
while minimizing the need for interpretation, DOE is adopting the 
following definitions for close-coupled and mechanically-coupled pumps, 
where the italicized portions of each definition are revisions to the 
definitions proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. A close-coupled pump means 
a pump in which the driver's bearings are designed to absorb the pump's 
axial load. A mechanically-coupled pump means a pump in which bearings 
external to the driver are designed to absorb the pump's axial load.
    In response to the comment from Grundfos, DOE notes the change in 
definition is intended to improve clarity rather than substantively 
shift the bounds of the ESCC or ESFM pump categories. DOE has 
determined, based on its review of manufacturer literature and the 
consensus of industry in the form of HI's comments, that the revisions 
to close-coupled and mechanically-coupled pumps do not change the 
classification of currently regulated end suction pumps.

C. Updates to Industry Standards

    The current DOE test procedure for pumps incorporates the following 
industry test standards: HI 40.6-2014, ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014, and ANSI/
HI 2.1-2.2-2014. 10 CFR 431.463. The following sections describe 
updates to these industry standards and discuss the industry standards 
DOE is incorporating by reference in the final rule and the relevant 
provisions of those industry standards that DOE is referencing.
1. ANSI/HI 40.6
    The current DOE test procedure for pumps incorporates HI 40.6-2014 
for use in appendix A. The most recent version of HI 40.6 was published 
in 2021 (``HI 40.6-2021''). HI 40.6-2021 includes the following updates 
to HI 40.6-2014 (relevant sections of HI 40.6-2021 are included in 
parentheses after a summary of the modification):

    (1) Clarified that the industy testing standard covers 
efficiency testing of rotodynamic pumps that are subject to DOE's 
energy conservation standards. (Section 40.6.1 ``Scope'').
    (2) Updated the calculation of bare pump efficiency to match the 
current DOE test procedure requirements for plotting test data to 
determine the best efficiency point (``BEP'') rate of flow. (Section 
40.6.6.3 ``Performance curve'').
    (3) Updated the description and requirements of the pressure tap 
configuration for measurement sections at inlet and outlet of the 
pump. (Section A.3.1.3 ``Pressure taps'').
    (4) Added an informative appendix for determining, applying, and 
calculating measurement instrument uncertainty. (Appendix H 
``Determination, application, and calculation of instrument 
(systematic) uncertainty (informative)'').
    (5) References ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2 ``Rotodynamic Pumps for 
Nomenclature and Definitions'' (``ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2'') which 
supersedes ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. (Section 
40.6.4.1 ``Vertically suspended pumps''; Section 40.6.4.3 ``All 
other pump types'').
    (6) Includes a new appendix (Appendix E) for the testing of 
circulator pumps. (Appendix E ``Testing Circulator Pumps'').

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that the 
provisions of HI 40.6-2021 that correspond to the provisions in HI 
40.6-2014 are substantively the same and adopting such provisions would 
not change the current test procedure or measured PEI values. 87 FR 
21268, 21285. Therefore, in the April 2022 NOPR DOE proposed to 
incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 in place of HI 40.6-2014, in 
order to reference the most current industry test procedure. Id.
    DOE received no comments on its proposal to incorporate HI 40.6-
2021 by reference for use in appendix A of the DOE test procedure. 
Therefore, in this final rule DOE is incorporating HI 40.6-2021 by 
reference as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
    While DOE proposed to incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 as the 
basis for its proposed test procedure, DOE tentatively determined in 
the April 2022 NOPR that certain sections of the industry test standard 
are not applicable to the DOE test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21285. 
Specifically:

    (1) Section 40.6.1, Scope, provides the scope specific to the 
test methods outlined in HI 40.6-2021;
    (2) Section 40.6.5.3 provides provisions regarding the 
generation of a test report;
    (3) Appendix ``B'' provides informative guidance on test report 
formatting;
    (4) Appendix ``E'' provides normative test procedures for 
circulator pumps; and
    (5) Appendix ``G'' compares HI 40.6-2021 and DOE's nomenclature. 
Id.

    None of these sections are required for testing and rating pumps in 
accordance with the test procedure that DOE proposed in the April 2022 
NOPR. As such, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to not adopt 
Section 40.6.1, Section 40.6.5.3, appendix B, appendix E, and appendix 
G in the April 2022 NOPR. Id.
    DOE received no comments on the proposal to exclude the specified 
sections of HI 40.6-2021 from the DOE test procedure. Therefore, in 
this final rule, DOE is adopting the exclusions as proposed in the 
April 2022 NOPR.
    Additionally, as discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, certain 
provisions of HI 40.6-2021 are consistent with the provisions of the 
current DOE test procedure in appendix A. 87 FR 21268, 21285. DOE 
proposed to remove these provisions in appendix A and instead reference 
the appropriate sections of HI 40.6-2021, specifically:


[[Page 17950]]


    (1) Section I.D.1 of appendix A, which addresses damping 
devices, is amended to reference the corresponding provisions in HI 
40.6.3.2.2;
    (2) Section I.D.2 of appendix A, which addresses stabilization, 
is amended to reference the corresponding provisions in HI 
40.6.5.5.1;
    (3) Section I.D.3 of appendix A, which addresses calculations 
and rounding, is amended to reference the corresponding provisions 
in HI 40.6.6.1.1;
    (4) Sections III.D.1, IV.D.1, V.D.1, VI.D.1, and VII.D.1 of 
appendix A, which outline testing the BEP of different pump 
configurations, are amended to reference the corresponding 
provisions in HI 40.6.5.5.1. Id.

    DOE received no comments on its proposal to remove provisions of 
appendix A and instead reference the equivalent provisions in HI 40.6-
2021 and is therefore adopting the revisions as proposed in the April 
2022 NOPR.
2. ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014
    Subpart Y to part 431 currently incorporates by reference ANSI/HI 
1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. DOE references ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-
2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 for defining certain terms in 10 CFR 
431.462. In 2019, ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 were 
updated and combined into ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, ``American National 
Standard for Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and Definitions'' 
(``ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019''). The notable additions to ANSI/HI 14.1-
14.2 that were absent in ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 
are outlined below:

    (1) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 includes additional figures and 
tables to represent information included in ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and 
ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014;
    (2) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 adds new pump definitions and pump 
classifications;
    (3) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 includes configuration definitions 
for vertical in-line, vertical end-suction, vertical self-priming, 
seal-less, magnetic drive, canned motor, and multi-stage pumps;
    (4) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 adds new definitions for discharge 
casing, volute, concentric casing, modified concentric casing, vaned 
diffuser/collector, bowl, and stage casing; and \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ A volute may also be referred to as a ``housing'' or 
``casing.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (5) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 includes a new ``preferred operating 
region'' section to define a guideline for recommended operating 
flow rates.

    As stated previously, the current DOE test procedure incorporates 
pump designations from ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 as 
examples for the definitions of ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps under 
the DOE test procedure. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE notes that, in general, the 
references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 are in the 
context of providing non-limiting examples. DOE is concerned that 
continued inclusion of HI pump designations as examples of specific 
pump categories may cause confusion in the market or be misunderstood 
to limit the scope of the relevant definitions. To minimize potential 
misapplication of its definitions, DOE is removing the references to 
ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 as examples of certain 
pump category definitions, as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 
21268, 21286. Additional detail on the adopted changes to the 
definitions is discussed in section III.B.2 of this document.
    Additionally, DOE's current test procedure definition of ``bowl 
diameter'' relies on the ``intermediate bowl'' definition in ANSI/HI 
2.1-2.2-2014. As proposed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE is modifying its 
definition for ``bowl diameter'' and adding a DOE definition for 
``bowl'' to remove the current reference to ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. Id. 
These changes will create a more self-contained definition and are 
discussed in section III.B.3 of this document.
    DOE is incorporating ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 by reference for use in 
appendix A since it is referenced in HI 40.6-2019. However, DOE does 
not directly reference ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 in appendix A.

D. Metric

    The current energy efficiency standards for pumps are based on the 
PEI metric. 10 CFR 431.465. The PEI metric is a ratio of the pump 
energy rating (``PER'') of the tested pump to the PER of a minimally 
compliant pump (``PERSTD''). See section II of appendix A. 
The current test procedure defines the PEICL metric as the 
pump energy index for a constant load, as applicable to pumps rated as 
bare pumps or sold with motors; and the PEIVL metric, the 
pump energy index for a variable load, as applicable to pumps sold with 
motors and continuous controls or noncontinuous controls. Appendix A, 
section II.A. A ``continuous control'' is a control that adjusts the 
speed of the pump driver continuously over the driver's operating speed 
range in response to incremental changes in the required pump flow, 
head, or power output. 10 CFR 431.462. A ``non-continuous control'' is 
a control that adjusts the speed of a driver to one of a discrete 
number of non-continuous pre-set operating speeds and does not respond 
to incremental reductions in the required pump flow, head, or power 
output. Id.
    PERCL is calculated as the average of driver power input 
at 75 percent, 100 percent, and 110 percent of flow at the BEP, where 
the flows are achieved by varying the operating head to follow the pump 
performance curve. See appendix A, section II.A.1 and subsequently 
referenced sections. PERVL is calculated as the average of 
driver power input at 25 percent, 50 percent, 75 percent, and 100 
percent of flow at BEP, where the flows are achieved by speed reduction 
to follow a specified system curve. See appendix A, section II.A.2 and 
subsequently referenced sections. BEP is defined as the pump hydraulic 
power operating point (consisting of both flow and head conditions) 
that results in the maximum efficiency. 10 CFR 431.462.
    This section discusses the regulatory metric for SVIL pumps and 
additional clean water pumps that DOE is incorporating into its test 
procedure.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, based on manufacturer feedback to this 
rulemaking and the current circulator pumps rulemaking,\25\ DOE 
tentatively determined that use of PERCL and 
PERVL and indexing the results against PERSTD 
would be a reasonable and consistent way to evaluate SVIL performance. 
87 FR 21268, 21286. This determination was based largely on the 
similarity of SVILs to in-line pumps, which are evaluated using the 
PERCL and PERVL metrics. Id. As such, DOE 
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that the rating metric for SVIL pumps 
would be PEICL for constant load pumps and PEIVL 
for variable load pumps, equivalent to the metric already in use for 
currently covered commercial and industrial pumps. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ A link to the circulator pumps docket web page can be found 
at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2016-BT-STD-0004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 2022 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that, for BB, VT, 
and RSH pumps, the test procedure will measure energy efficiency during 
a representative average use cycle and not be unduly burdensome to 
conduct. 87 FR 21268, 21286. This determination was based on the 
similarities between the pump categories that are addressed in the 
current test procedure and those that DOE proposed to include in the 
scope of the test procedure. Id. DOE tentatively determined that 
PEICL and PEIVL are appropriate metrics for BB, 
VT, and RSH pumps. Id. Using PEICL and PEIVL for 
these additional pump categories ensures a consistent rating approach 
in the market. Id. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that the 
PEICL and PEIVL metric would be used

[[Page 17951]]

for rating the performance of BB, VT, and RSH pumps. Id.
    For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs, for SVIL, 
VT, and RSH pumps, DOE is adopting PEICL for constant load 
pumps and PEIVL for variable load pumps, equivalent to the 
metric already in use for currently covered commercial and industrial 
pumps.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, China suggested that DOE revise 
PERstd on the basis of a scientific assessment of the new 
pumps being added to the test procedure scope. (China, No. 29 at p. 3) 
DOE notes that this test procedure final rule does contain amendments 
that may adjust PERstd for both current and expanded scope 
pumps. However, the overall methodology of determining 
PERstd does not differ by pump category; PERstd 
is specific to the flow and specific speed of a given pump model and 
includes a C-value that sets the energy conservation standard and is 
specific to a given pump category. Adopting a C-value for the expanded 
scope pumps would be considered in an energy conservation standard 
rulemaking rather than in this test procedure rulemaking.

E. Amendments to Test Method

    DOE is incorporating HI 40.6-2021 into appendix A of subpart Y of 
10 CFR part 431. HI 40.6-2021 specifies calculating pump power 
input,\26\ driver power input (for testing-based methods),\27\ pump 
power output,\28\ pump efficiency,\29\ bowl efficiency,\30\ overall 
efficiency,\31\ and other relevant values at the specified load points 
necessary to determine PEICL and PEIVL. HI 40.6-
2021 also contains provisions for test methodology, standard rating 
conditions, equipment specifications, uncertainty calculations, and 
tolerances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The term ``pump power input'' in HI 40.6-2021 is defined as 
``the power transmitted to the pump by its driver'' and is 
synonymous with the term ``pump shaft input power,'' as used in this 
document.
    \27\ The term ``driver power input'' in HI 40.6-2014 is defined 
as ``the power absorbed by the pump driver'' and is synonymous with 
the term ``pump input power to the driver,'' as used in this 
document.
    \28\ The term ``pump power output'' in HI-40.6-2021 is defined 
as ``the mechanical power transferred to the liquid as it passes 
through the pump, also known as pump hydraulic power.'' It is used 
synonymously with ``pump hydraulic power'' in this document.
    \29\ The term ``pump efficiency'' is defined in HI 40.6-2014 as 
a ratio of pump power output to pump power input.
    \30\ The term ``bowl efficiency'' is defined in HI 40.6-2014 as 
a ratio of pump power output to bowl assembly power input and is 
applicable only to VTS and RSV pumps.
    \31\ The term ``overall efficiency'' is defined in HI 40.6-2014 
as a ratio of pump power output to driver power input and describes 
the combined efficiency of a pump and driver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sections II through VII of appendix A specify methods for 
determining PEICL and PEIVL for pumps based on 
whether they are distributed into commerce with a motor and/or with 
controls. These sections are summarized as follows:
     Section II: Calculation of PEICL or PEIVL for all pumps 
based on the pump energy rating for a minimally compliant reference 
pump (PERCL or PERVL, respectively);
     Section III: Test procedure for bare pumps;
     Section IV: Testing-based approach for pumps sold with 
motors;
     Section V: Calculation-based approach for pumps sold with 
motors;
     Section VI: Testing-based approach for pumps sold with 
motors and controls; and
     Section VII: Calculation-based approach for pumps sold 
with motors and controls.
    See appendix A, sections I.A.2 through I.A.6.
    The following sections summarize the amendments to the current test 
procedure that DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR, address stakeholder 
comments on these proposals, and finalize provisions for the amended 
test procedure.
1. Nominal Speed
    The scope of the current test procedure is limited to pumps 
designed to operate with either a 2- or 4-pole induction motor or a 
non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating range between 
2,880 and 4,320 rpm and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm. 10 CFR 
431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). Section I.C.1 of appendix A specifies the 
selection of nominal speed of rotation of either 1,800 or 3,600 rpm 
depending on the number of poles of the motor or the operating range of 
non-induction motors.
    As discussed in section III.A.4.b, DOE is including pumps that 
operate at greater than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm or 
are designed to operate with 6-pole motors in the test procedure. In 
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that these pumps would be tested with 
a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21287. DOE also proposed to 
update the calculation and rounding sections of the test procedure to 
address this additional nominal speed. Id.
    China commented that the DOE test procedure for 1,200 rpm pumps may 
result in cavitation and suggested that DOE instead provide a speed 
reduction test using pump affinity rules. (China, No. 29 at p. 3)
    DOE notes that the test procedure for 1,200 rpm pumps would use a 
nominal test speed of 1,200 rpm. DOE has determined that this would be 
most representative of field operation for these pumps. If cavitation 
occurs at 1,200 rpm for a given pump under test, DOE considers that 
this is representative of field performance and is therefore a valid 
test. No other stakeholders identified cavitation as an issue for 1,200 
rpm pumps.
    HI stated it expects testing 6-pole pumps will significantly 
increase test burden and test cost; however, HI expects minimal energy 
savings relative to manufacturer impact since the volume of equipment 
impacted is small. (HI, No. 33 at p.3). Specifically, HI stated that 
most of these pumps are already regulated as 4-pole products. Id.
    In response to HI's comments, DOE notes that increased burden 
associated with test procedure modifications is estimated and discussed 
in section III.L of this document. DOE will evaluate energy savings 
during its energy conservation standards rulemaking.
    In this final rule, DOE is adopting the amendments to the test 
procedure as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. Testing of Multi-Stage Pumps
    The current DOE test procedure specifies that RSV pumps shall be 
tested with three stages and that ST pumps shall be tested with nine 
stages. If the unit under test is only available with fewer than the 
required number of stages, the pump is tested with the maximum number 
of stages with which the unit is distributed in commerce in the United 
States. If the unit under test is only available with greater than the 
number of required stages, the pump is tested with the lowest number of 
stages with which the unit is distributed in commerce in the United 
States. If the unit under test is available with both fewer and greater 
than the required number of stages, but not the required number of 
stages, the pump is tested with the number of stages closest to the 
required number of stages. If both the next lower and next higher 
number of stages are equivalently close to the required number of 
stages, the pump is tested with the next higher number of stages. See 
appendix A, section I.C.2.
    RSH and VT pumps also may be sold with a varying number of stages, 
in which the same pump may have options for multiple different stages 
for multiple applications. To reduce testing burden and mirror the 
practice established for RSV pumps, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR 
that RSH pumps be tested with three stages. 87 FR 21268, 21287. To 
reduce testing burden and mirror the

[[Page 17952]]

practice established for ST pumps, DOE proposed testing VT pumps with 
nine stages. Id. If the pump under test is not distributed in commerce 
with the number of stages prescribed for testing, DOE proposed that the 
existing instructions for selecting the correct number of stages during 
testing would be followed. Id.
    As defined in section III.B.5, BB pumps can have either one or two 
stages. For BB basic models that are distributed into commerce with 
both one and two stages, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to test BB 
pumps at two stages. 87 FR 21268, 21287. DOE discussed that this 
approach is consistent with the provisions in the current test 
procedure that require multi-stage pumps be tested with more than one 
stage. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI and Grundfos supported the 
proposed number of stages for testing RSH, VT, and BB pumps. (HI, No. 
33 at p. 5; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) HI additionally commented that a 
one-stage BB pump and a two-stage BB pump will always be different 
basic models. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5) China requested that DOE provide 
additional description for when BB pumps would be tested using one-
stage versus two-stage. (China, No. 29 at p. 4)
    As DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of this test 
procedure DOE is not adopting the multi-stage testing provisions for BB 
pumps proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
    For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs, DOE is 
adopting the number of stages for testing RSH and VT pumps test 
procedure as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
3. Load Profile
    The current test procedure requires that the constant load pump 
energy rating be determined using 75, 100 and 110 percent of BEP flow 
with each value multiplied by 0.3333 and the results summed to 
determine PERCL. Appendix A, sections III.E, IV.E, V.E. 
Similarly, for variable load pumps, energy ratings are determined at 
25, 50, 75, and 100 percent of BEP flow with each point weighted by 
0.25 and summed to obtain a value for PERVL. Appendix A, 
sections VI.E, VII.E.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed the current load profiles in 
response to comments received from stakeholders on the April 2021 RFI. 
87 FR 21268, 21288. Specifically, DOE agreed with stakeholders that 
load profiles vary depending on the pump installation environment and 
application; however, DOE stated that the existing load profiles 
provide a consistent method for comparing the performance of different 
pumps. Id. DOE did not propose to modify the current load profiles in 
the April 2022 NOPR.
    NEEA recommended that DOE consider test procedures and metrics that 
better account for motor and control performance at various load points 
in the future. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) The CA IOUs stated that they are 
not aware of any reports that provide BB pump-specific operating hour 
ranges but suggested that DOE review industrial cooling, boiler 
feedwater, and municipal water supply application reports. (CA IOUs, 
No. 32 at p. 3)
    As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE is not revising the 
current load profiles in this final rule notice. Additionally, SVIL, 
VT, and RSH pumps will use the same load profiles as other pumps 
previously covered in the scope of this rulemaking and described in the 
preceding paragraphs. DOE will continue to evaluate the impact of load 
profile on PEI.
4. Pumps With BEP at Run-Out
    To determine a pump's BEP, the DOE test procedure references 
testing provisions included in HI 40.6-2014 (excluding sections 
40.6.5.3, section A.7 and appendix B) at the following seven flow 
points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected BEP 
flow rate of the pump at the nominal speed of rotation. Appendix A, 
section III.D.1. All pumps have a maximum flow rate which is termed 
``run-out.'' For pumps where the BEP is expected to be within 20 
percent of the maximum flow rate of the pump (BEP at run-out), section 
I.D.4 of appendix A provides alternative flow points, with the maximum 
flow point equal to 100 percent of the expected maximum flow rate so 
that the pump may safely operate. As discussed in section III.C.1, 
Sections 40.6.5.5.1 and 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-2021 now include provisions 
related to pumps with BEP at run-out. Section 40.6.5.5.1 provides 
alternate test points based on the expected BEP rate of flow for pumps 
with a maximum allowable flow rate as specified by the manufacturer 
that is less than 120 percent of the BEP flow rate. Section 40.6.6.3 
also provides alternate tested load points for the driver input power 
as a percentage of BEP flow rate for pumps that cannot be safely tested 
to flows greater than 120 percent of BEP. However, these provisions are 
based on flow points with respect to expected BEP flow rate rather than 
expected maximum flow rate.
    In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE responded to a comment from HI 
that in order to determine the location of BEP, testing must occur at 
rates of flow greater than 100 percent of expected BEP flow. 81 FR 
4086, 4117. DOE stated that its proposal to use flow points only up to 
100 percent was with respect to the expected maximum allowable flow 
rate rather than with respect to expected BEP. Id. DOE notes that the 
existing regulatory text contains an omission in which section I.D.4(1) 
of appendix A only refers to ``the expected,'' while section I.D.4(2) 
refers to ``the expected maximum flow rate of the pump.'' In the April 
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to include ``expected maximum flow rate of the 
pump'' in both section I.D.4(1) and I.D.4(2) of appendix A and would 
not reference sections 40.6.5.5.1 or 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-2021. 87 FR 
21268, 21288. DOE requested comment on whether the alternate flow 
points for pumps with BEP at run-out should be determined with respect 
to expected maximum flow rate or expected BEP flow rate. Id.
    In response, HI recommended that DOE modify the test procedure to 
require testing at 105 percent of BEP as a minimum criterion for pumps 
that cannot be tested to 120 percent of BEP. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5) HI 
suggested 105 percent of BEP because lower specific speed pumps can 
artificially benefit by truncating the actual BEP flow. Id. Grundfos 
commented that using the maximum flow rate provides a better curve for 
finding BEP and ensures that curve shape after BEP is properly captured 
(where possible). (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) Grundfos additionally 
stated that using maximum expected flow can require a second test in 
some cases, with small additional burden, if BEP is found to be plus or 
minus 5 percent of the tested points but noted that this burden would 
be small given the limited systems reporting using BEP at run-out 
provisions. Id.
    DOE notes that by relying on maximum expected flow rather than 
expected BEP flow rate, it is likely that most pumps would test at a 
minimum of 105 percent of BEP, as in most cases, maximum expected flow 
would not be less than 5% away from BEP. This addresses HI's suggestion 
to have a minimum point at 105 percent of BEP, while also making sure 
that all pumps in this category can be tested. This is also consistent 
with Grundfos' comment that maximum flow provides a better curve shape, 
especially after BEP. For these reasons, DOE is adopting BEP at run-out 
provisions as proposed.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed that the current regulatory 
text would benefit from additional detail as to how the revised loading

[[Page 17953]]

points should be applied in the determination of PERSTD. 87 
FR 21268, 21288. DOE proposed to specify that the revised loading 
points would only be used in application of the [alpha]i 
coefficient values when determining pump power input, and not when 
determining specific speed (``Ns'') or the minimally-compliant pump 
efficiency (``[eta]pump,STD''), which should always be based 
on 100 percent of BEP flow for standardization purposes. Id. DOE did 
not receive any comments regarding how the revised loading points 
should be applied in the determination of PERSTD. Therefore, 
DOE is including the language as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
    As part of the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also identified that the 
current provisions for pumps with BEP at run-out do not address how to 
perform motor sizing for bare pumps, which is based on the horsepower 
equivalent to, or the next highest horsepower greater than, the pump 
power input to the bare pump at 120 percent of the BEP flow rate of the 
tested pump. 87 FR 21268, 21288-21289. DOE proposed that for pumps with 
BEP at run-out, motor sizing would be based on 100 percent of the BEP 
flow rate of the tested pump, as there are no flow rates available 
higher than that level. Id. However, DOE acknowledged in the April 2022 
NOPR that this proposed change could result in inequitable motor sizing 
compared to pumps not subject to these provisions. Id.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos agreed with the use of 
maximum flow rate to ensure BEP can be determined for motor sizing for 
bare pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 6)
    In this final rule, DOE is including the motor sizing language for 
pumps with BEP at run-out, as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
5. Calibration of Measurement Equipment
    The current DOE test procedure references HI 40.6-2014 Appendix D, 
which specifies the frequency at which measurement equipment should be 
calibrated. Table D.1 of HI 40.6-2014 states that manufacturer's 
recommendations on calibration intervals should be followed if they 
differ from those in Table D.1. However, DOE notes that its test 
procedure does not explicitly reference Table D.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    In the dedicated-purpose pool pump test procedures included in 
appendices B and C to subpart Y of 10 CFR part 431 (``appendix B'', 
``appendix C''), DOE has included the calibration requirements 
contained in Appendix D of ANSI/HI 40.6-2014, with modification 
allowing for calibration periods up to 3 times longer than those 
specified in Table D.1 of ANSI/HI 40.6-2014 if justified by historical 
calibration data. See appendix B, section I.B.2 and appendix C, section 
I.B.2.
    Similar to the approach that DOE uses in appendix B and appendix C, 
DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to specifically reference the 
calibration requirements in Appendix D of HI 40.6-2021 in section I.B 
of appendix A to improve the overall clarity of its test procedure. 87 
FR 21268, 21289.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos agreed that including 
the reference to HI 40.6, Appendix D provides consistency and clarity 
regarding the required calibration requirements for testing. (Grundfos, 
No. 31 at p. 11).
    For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs and the 
stakeholder feedback received, DOE is adopting Table D.1 of ANSI/HI 
40.6-2021 as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
6. Calculations and Rounding
    The DOE test procedure includes provisions for calculations and 
rounding in section I.D.3 of appendix A. Generally, all measured data 
must be normalized such that it represents performance at nominal speed 
of rotation in accordance with HI 40.6-2014, and all calculations must 
be carried out using raw measured values without rounding. See appendix 
A, section I.D.3. PER is rounded to three significant digits and PEI is 
rounded to the hundredths place. Id. Explicit rounding directions are 
not provided for other parameters.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE did not propose any changes to its 
current rounding requirements, except for updates to reference the 
appropriate section of HI 40.6-2021, as discussed in section III.C.1 of 
this document. 87 FR 21268, 21289.
    DOE did not receive comments on this proposal. For the reasons 
discussed in the preceding paragraphs and in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE 
is adopting the updated references as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.

F. Calculation-Based and Testing-Based Options According to Pump 
Configuration (Table 1 of Appendix A)

    The DOE test procedure for pumps includes calculation-based and 
testing-based options that apply based on pump configuration (including 
style of motor and control) as distributed in commerce. See appendix A, 
Table 1. The calculation-based options rely on a bare pump test, 
whereas the testing-based options rely on a ``wire-to-water'' test. The 
calculation-based options may reduce test burden by allowing a 
manufacturer to test a sample of bare pumps and use that data to rate 
multiple pump configurations using calculation-based methods. On the 
other hand, wire-to-water testing may more accurately represent pump, 
motor, and control performance.
1. Hybrid Mapping Approach
    In response to the April 2021 RFI, NEEA recommended that DOE 
consider a hybrid approach to testing and calculation, similar to the 
test method included in Appendix H of ANSI/AMCA Standard 214-21, ``Test 
Procedure for Calculating Fan Energy Index (FEI) for Commercial and 
Industrial Fans and Blowers'' (''AMCA 214''), which stipulates a one-
time test of the motor at multiple load points, which can be used to 
determine the input power at the appropriate pump test procedure load 
points and then used to calculate a rating. With this method, each 
motor need only be tested once, and the results used for multiple pump 
configurations. (NEEA, No. 21 at p. 10)
    Similarly, in response to the April 2021 RFI, with respect to pumps 
sold with inverter-only motors, the CA IOUs cautioned against the use 
of a losses table for permanent magnet inverter-only motors with a non-
integrated controller sold with a choice of controller due to variance 
in performance between drive units (as opposed to induction motors, 
which are relatively uninfluenced by choice of drive unit) and instead 
recommended this subset use a hybrid power drive system mapping 
procedure, which they expected would reduce burden. (CA IOUs, No. 19 at 
pp. 8-9)
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE acknowledged that permanent magnet 
inverter-only motors sold without a controller may perform differently 
based on the inverter with which it is paired and recognized that a 
hybrid mapping approach may be beneficial. 87 FR 21268, 21290, 21299. 
However, DOE stated that it did not expect that the use of a hybrid 
mapping approach would provide the burden reduction intended by the use 
of the calculation method. 87 FR 21268, 21299. While the hybrid mapping 
approach would be less burdensome than multiple wire-to-water tests, it 
would likely be significantly more burdensome than a calculation-based 
approach based on a bare pump test, as it would require physical tests 
of all motors with which the bare pump would be paired. Id. 
Furthermore, DOE

[[Page 17954]]

tentatively concluded that the calculation-based approach is sufficient 
to generate appropriately representative values for this equipment--and 
with the option to allow for a testing-based approach, or an AEDM as 
discussed in section III.I.2, a manufacturer would be free to refine 
accuracy of the values for specific equipment. Id.
    DOE did not propose a hybrid approach in the April 2022 NOPR but 
requested comment on whether manufacturers would use a hybrid mapping 
approach, and if so, whether manufacturers would conduct the motor 
tests or request the tests from their suppliers. 87 FR 21268, 21290. In 
addition, DOE requested comment on what additional provisions would 
need to be added to Appendix H of AMCA 214 to make it applicable to 
pumps, such as speed and load corresponding to pump rating points. Id. 
Finally, DOE requested comment on the merits of using a hybrid mapping 
approach specific to inverter-only motors and whether it would reduce 
or increase manufacturer burden compared to the current proposals. 87 
FR 21268, 21299.
    HI stated that hybrid mapping is not a current practice, so 
including this would add complexity and confusion, without an 
understood benefit. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6, 7) HI stated that the hybrid 
approach would be significantly more burdensome than a calculation-
based approach based on a bare pump test, and that the calculation 
approach based on coefficients and bare pump test is sufficient to 
generate appropriately representative values or the equipment. (HI, No. 
33 at p. 7). HI added that in many cases hybrid mapping data would not 
be available. For these reasons HI is not in favor of a hybrid mapping 
approach for inverter-only motors. Id.
    Grundfos stated that compared to the current proposals of 
calculated method and AEDM, it did not believe a hybrid mapping 
approach would reduce burden. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) Grundfos 
commented that a hybrid mapping approach is not currently necessary 
since DOE has proposed a method for calculating PEIs for pumps sold 
with inverter[hyphen]only motors. Id. at 6. However, Grundfos also 
stated they believe a hybrid mapping approach could provide more 
representative PEIs when compared to calculation[hyphen]based 
approaches, but that more effort would be necessary to define a 
suitable motor mapping procedure to ensure it is applicable to pumping. 
Id.
    NEEA recommended that in future proceedings DOE consider an 
optional hybrid approach to testing pumps sold with inverter-only 
synchronous motors to show the improvement in Pump Energy Index (PEI) 
from IE5 motors. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2)
    DOE agrees with stakeholders that it is premature to develop a 
hybrid mapping approach in this rulemaking, but notes that DOE may 
consider the issue in future rulemakings.
2. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Induction Motors and Controls
    Based on its review of available coefficients and part-load loss 
data, DOE tentatively determined in the April 2022 NOPR that without 
further data indicating that its current coefficients overstate motor 
drive system losses for pumps, it would retain its current loss model 
for motors less than 50 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21296. DOE noted that its 
current coefficients correspond to about 30 percent added harmonic 
losses and a 3 percent variable frequency drive (``VFD'') efficiency 
penalty. Id. DOE stated that it would consider revising its 
coefficients below 50 hp in accordance with the method suggested by 
HI,\32\ or to harmonize with fans or with international standards, 
given appropriate data specific to pumps. Id. To ensure that the 
calculation method does not overrate pumps, while balancing 
stakeholders' requests for representativeness, DOE proposed to allow 
use of an AEDM, as discussed in section III.I.2 of this document. Id. 
DOE requested (1) data indicating whether AHRI 1210-certified data is 
applicable to pumps as well as any other applicable part-load loss 
data; (2) data indicating whether 15 percent and 25 percent incremental 
losses, which are specified as part of IE3 ratings that are not 
commonly used in the U.S., are applicable to the U.S. and do not 
overstate performance, and if not, what incremental losses would be 
appropriate to apply, and (3) data indicating an appropriate VFD 
efficiency penalty by hp. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ HI suggested new part load loss coefficients based on the 
differences between incremental losses predicted by IEC 60034-31 and 
the current DOE part load loss coefficients. (HI, No. 22 at p. 3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HI stated that related to item 2, the 15 percent and 25 percent 
incremental losses are appropriate and should be representative of 
motors commonly used in the U.S. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI understood 
that NEMA supported these values and is adopting them into a future 
American National Standard. Id.
    In its comment to the April 2021 RFI, HI stated that losses are 
especially overstated in the 50 hp to 100 hp range. (HI, No. 22 at p.3) 
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed its findings that its existing 
coefficients show a decrease in full-load efficiency at 75 hp, which 
would not be expected. 87 FR 21268, 21296. In addition, DOE noted that 
the AHRI 1210-certified data is limited to a maximum of 75 hp and does 
not exist at higher hp. Id. Furthermore, DOE stated that its current 
coefficients in the 50 hp to 100 hp range correspond to about 60 
percent added harmonic losses and a 3 percent VFD penalty, and, based 
on previous discussion of typical losses, DOE tentatively determined 
that these losses are too high. Id.
    In light of the fact that DOE's coefficients in the 50 hp to 100 hp 
represent harmonic losses that are too high, DOE proposed in the April 
2022 NOPR to update its coefficients for motors rated at 50 hp and 
above. 87 FR 21268, 21296. To adjust its coefficients for motors 50 hp 
and above, DOE started with the current DOE default losses for the 
motor-only at full-load and added 15 to 25 percent losses, as 
applicable, as well as a VFD efficiency penalty of 3 percent. Id. DOE 
then adjusted the current DOE default losses for the motor and control 
at 100 percent to match the result of adding the incremental harmonic 
losses and VFD penalty, and applied the same adjustment factor to all 
load points. Id. Table III.1 summarizes DOE's proposal for the 
induction motor and control part-load loss coefficients. Id. DOE 
requested comment on its proposed part-load loss factors for induction 
motors and controls greater than 50 hp. Id.

          Table III.1--Proposed Induction Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Coefficients for induction motor and control
                                                                            part load loss factor (zi)
                      Motor horsepower (hp)                      -----------------------------------------------
                                                                         a               b               c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5.............................................................         -0.4658          1.4965          0.5303

[[Page 17955]]

 
>5 and <=20.....................................................         -1.3198          2.9551          0.1052
>20 and <=50....................................................         -1.5122          3.0777          0.1847
>50 and <=100...................................................         -0.6629          2.1452          0.1952
>100............................................................         -0.7583          2.4538          0.2233
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Grundfos agreed that the updated coefficients better represent 
losses for motors greater than 50 hp. (Grundfos, No. 30 at p. 6) HI 
stated that it reviewed the coefficients proposed by DOE compared to 
those suggested by HI and noted only minor deviations in the calculated 
PEI. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI supported the part-load loss factors for 
induction motors and controls proposed by DOE. Id.
    For the reasons discussed previously, and based on stakeholder 
feedback, DOE is finalizing the updated induction motor and control 
part load loss factor equation coefficients as proposed and shown in 
Table III.1.
3. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Inverter-Only Motors (With or 
Without Controls)
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that, to the extent that DOE 
adopts a definition, test procedure, and energy conservation standard 
for synchronous electric motors that are inverter-only electric motors, 
DOE would reference such regulations in the pumps test procedure, 
allowing for the use of the calculation method by pumps sold with 
synchronous electric motors that are inverter-only electric motors. 87 
FR 21268, 21298.
a. Reliance on DOE Motors Test Procedure and Development of 
Coefficients
    DOE published a NOPR regarding the test procedures for motors 
(``Motors TP NOPR''), in which DOE proposed to test inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors (inclusive of the inverter) that include an 
inverter in accordance with section 7.7.2 of IEC 61800-9-2:2017, using 
the test provisions specified in section 7.7.3.5 and testing conditions 
specified in section 7.10. 86 FR 71710, 71742 (Dec. 17, 2021). DOE 
proposed to test inverter-only synchronous electric motors that do not 
include an inverter in the same manner and to specify that testing must 
be performed using an inverter as recommended in manufacturer catalogs 
or offered for sale with the electric motor. Id. In the April 2022 
NOPR, DOE proposed to require the nameplate efficiency of the inverter-
only synchronous electric motors tested in accordance with any relevant 
test procedure in subpart B to part 431, if available, or if not 
available, in accordance with the DOE motors test procedure, should it 
be finalized. 87 FR 21268, 21298. DOE noted that this nameplate 
efficiency, as proposed, would be representative of the motor + 
inverter efficiency rather than just the motor efficiency. Id.
    As proposed in the Motors TP NOPR, manufacturers of synchronous 
electric motors would not be required to test according to the DOE test 
procedure, if finalized, until the compliance date of energy 
conservation standards. 86 FR 71710, 71716. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE 
stated that should it finalize a test procedure for these motors, there 
may be a period of time in which motor manufacturers would not be 
required to publish efficiency information for these motors. 87 FR 
21268, 21298. However, DOE stated that since the proposed electric 
motors test procedure is an IEC test procedure, if DOE's proposal in 
the Motors TP NOPR were finalized, the tested efficiency of the 
synchronous inverter-only electric motors + inverters would likely 
already be available. Id.
    Based on this premise, DOE proceeded to discuss a proposal 
regarding development of coefficients for the calculation method for 
pumps sold with inverter-only motors. 87 FR 21268, 21297-21299. DOE 
noted that in a submittal responding to the April 2021 RFI, HI stated 
that it developed coefficients and calculation modifications for 
inverter-only motors by establishing the incremental loss delta between 
power drive systems operating with induction motors and power drive 
systems operating with inverter-only motors. (HI, No. 22 at pp. 1-2) HI 
commented that it used actual motor data from multiple manufacturers to 
calculate these coefficients. Id. The coefficients developed by HI 
would require using either IE4 or IE5 minimum efficiencies (IEC 60034-
30-2) \33\ in the Section VII calculation for the equipped motor 
efficiency in appendix A. Id. HI also provided limited comparisons of 
the recommended inverter-only calculation method to test data for IE5 
products. In five out of six cases, the calculation method resulted in 
a PEI equivalent to or higher than the test method. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The International Electrotechnical Commission (``IEC'') 
standards IEC 60034-30 for variable-speed electric motors 
establishes an efficiency classification system for these motors. 
Efficiency classes are designated as IE1, IE2, IE3, IE4, and 
IE5.nIE4 is an approximation of super premium efficiency motors and 
IE5 is the IEC designation for ultra-premium efficiency motors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that while it did not have data 
to evaluate HI's part load loss model quantitatively, DOE did plot HI's 
suggested model and preliminarily found the resulting trends in losses 
to be reasonable in relation to the expected loss differences between 
induction and synchronous electric motors. 87 FR 21268, 21298. 
Specifically, HI's suggested model showed inverter-only motors to be 
more efficient at part-load when compared to DOE's loss model for 
induction motors. Id. Further, HI's suggested model showed higher 
efficiency at full-load compared to DOE's loss model for induction 
motors--an expected outcome given that induction motor efficiency is 
set at a NEMA Premium level, whereas inverter-only efficiency is Super 
Premium. Id.
    However, DOE identified three concerns with the HI's suggested 
model which it discussed in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21298. 
First, the HI-provided comparison of wire-to-water test data with 
results from the calculation method using the recommended coefficients 
resulted in one case where the PEI rating determined using the 
calculation method was lower than the PEI rating determined using the 
test method. Id. Second, HI's proposed coefficients were based on a 
delta between induction motors and inverter-only motors, and

[[Page 17956]]

DOE did not propose to adopt HI's proposed induction motor coefficients 
in the April 2022 NOPR. Id. Third, HI's coefficients are applicable to 
motor-only efficiency, while DOE's proposed test procedure for 
inverter-only motors includes efficiency for the motor + inverter 
combined. Id.
    Therefore, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to make slight 
modifications to the inverter-only coefficients proposed by HI. 87 FR 
21268, 21298. Specifically, DOE started with the proposed revised DOE 
induction motor and control coefficients, then applied the deltas 
provided by HI (the difference in efficiency points between a 
synchronous motor + control versus induction motor + control at 
different load points and different hp ranges), and then normalized to 
the motor + control losses (rather than the motor only losses). Id. 
Table III.2 shows the inverter-only motor and control part-load loss 
factor coefficients proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. These coefficients 
result in slightly higher losses than the HI model across all hp. 87 FR 
21268, 21298. DOE requested comment on its proposed inverter-only part-
load loss coefficients, specifically on the appropriateness of the 
delta used to derive these coefficients as well as any other available 
comparable motor data with which DOE could vet these coefficients. 87 
FR 21268, 21299.

        Table III.2--Proposed Inverter-Only Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Coefficients for induction motor and control
                                                                            part load loss factor (zi)
                      Motor horsepower (hp)                      -----------------------------------------------
                                                                         a               b               c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5.............................................................         -0.0898          1.0251          0.0667
>5 and <=20.....................................................         -0.1591          1.1683         -0.0085
>20 and <=50....................................................         -0.4071          1.4028          0.0055
>50 and <=100...................................................         -0.3341          1.3377         -0.0023
>100............................................................         -0.0749          1.0864         -0.0096
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Efficiency Advocates supported DOE's proposal to permit use of 
a calculation-based method for pumps sold with inverter-only motors. 
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 32 at p. 3) They commented that inverter-
only motors are highly efficient, and that a calculation-based method 
may reduce testing burden and facilitate adoption of pumps using these 
highly efficient motors. Id.
    The CA IOUs supported inverter-only calculation methods discussed 
in the April 2022 NOPR for inverter-only pumps and added that the 
operating points are consistent with observations on field metered pump 
load profiles, operating speed assumptions, and other industry 
standards. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 6) The CA IOUs also agreed that the 
proposed coefficients provide conservative calculation method results, 
which do not exceed wire-to-water measured performance and recommended 
DOE finalize the calculation method. Id. However, the CA IOUs stated 
that VFD to motor harmonic losses on the order of 30 percent is higher 
than standard practice or current generation products and indicated 
that they plan to submit data on this topic. Id. No such data were 
submitted.
    While Grundfos stated that the method DOE used to determine these 
coefficients is reasonable, it suggested using the manufacturer 
interview process to obtain this information from specific 
manufacturers under both the motor and/or pump rules. (Grundfos, No. 31 
at p. 6) Grundfos stated that it follows IEC 61800-9-2 for inverter-
only motors and publishes combined motor and inverter efficiency. Id.
    HI stated there is currently no standard methodology or 
specification for motor manufacturers to publish efficiency on the 
nameplate that includes motor and drive losses, and it is not typically 
available to pump manufacturers. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI added that 
some manufacturers are measuring and publishing wire-to-shaft 
efficiency with inverter-only motors, but only when integrated by the 
manufacturer and this information may not be on the nameplate. Id.
    HI commented that the coefficients proposed by HI in response to 
the April 2021 RFI added harmonic and VFD losses to the motor only 
losses as defined in IEC 60034-30-2, and that HI recommended using IE4 
motor efficiencies (IEC 60034-30-1) as a default for the synchronous 
motors. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI stated it understood that IEC 60034-30-
1 provides tables for the motor only and IEC 60034-30-2 provides a 
calculation method to take IEC 60034-30-1 values and determine the 
motor efficiency on the drive by applying the incremental losses 
through calculation. Id. Additionally, HI responded that the 
coefficients proposed by DOE are different than proposed by industry 
since they start with a combined motor and VFD efficiency, and that 
this value is not available to pump manufacturers and there is no 
specification for manufacturers to publish these data. Id. HI 
recommended that instead of using a nameplate value that is not 
available to pump manufacturers, DOE (1) use the IE4 motor only 
efficiencies as defaults and specify standard math to add the VFD 
losses, or (2) start with IE4 motor only efficiencies and include the 
VFD losses in the coefficients as proposed by HI in the April 2021 RFI. 
Id.
    NEEA supported the proposed calculation methodology for inverter-
only synchronous motors, but recommended DOE consider an interim 
approach until these motors are covered by DOE regulations. (NEEA, No. 
34 at p. 5) NEEA stated that it will take many years for the motors 
test procedure, should it proceed as written, to take effect and 
require testing of synchronous motors, and that this lag would cause 
confusion in the marketplace and stifle adoption of new technologies. 
Id. at 6. NEEA recommended that DOE incorporate by reference IEC 60034-
2-3 until DOE has regulations covering these motors. Id. NEEA added 
that IEC 60034-2-3 is the most appropriate motors test procedure for 
calculating full load motor efficiency values, and the values do not 
include inverter losses, therefore producing reasonable full load motor 
efficiency values to be used with the values DOE proposed in Table 
III.2 of the pumps NOPR when calculation PERVL.\34\ Id. NEEA 
further recommended that incorporation of IEC 60034-2-3 should no 
longer apply when the motors are covered by DOE regulations. Id. NEEA 
stated that it had no test data with

[[Page 17957]]

which to evaluate the coefficients proposed in Table III.2 in the April 
2022 NOPR, but supported the method used to determine the coefficients. 
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ DOE notes that Table III.2 of the April 2022 NOPR included 
coefficients relative to motor + inverter efficiency, so it is not 
clear what NEEA's proposal is referring to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NEEA additionally recommended that in the future, DOE consider test 
procedures and metrics that better account for motor and control 
performance at various load points. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) NEEA stated 
that as more inverter-only and synchronous motors are developed and 
deployed, differentiating motor and control performance at part load 
points will become increasingly important. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 7) NEEA 
noted that IE5-level motors can show more variability at part-load. Id. 
NEEA recommended that when IEC 61800-9-2 data are available, DOE 
consider revising the pumps test procedure to incorporate the specific 
losses at each load point as opposed to, or in addition to, the default 
loss curves. Id. NEEA stated this would allow manufacturers to showcase 
their improvements in efficiency and allow for more accurate 
representation of losses Id.
    On October 19, 2022, following submission of comments to the April 
2022 NOPR, DOE published a final rule regarding test procedures for 
motors (the ``Motors TP Final Rule''), which adopted a test procedure 
for inverter-only synchronous motors generally as proposed in 
accordance with IEC 61800-9-2:2017.87 FR 63588, 63659.
    Since the adopted DOE test procedure for electric motors relies on 
motor and inverter efficiency, and beginning 180 days following 
publication of that test procedure, any representations of energy 
consumption for those inverter-only synchronous electric motors must be 
made in accordance with that test procedure, DOE has determined that it 
would not be appropriate to have a pumps test procedure that relies on 
motor only efficiency for these same motors. Instead, the pumps test 
procedure should rely on motor and inverter efficiency tested in 
accordance with the DOE electric motors test procedure, consistent with 
the existing test procedure for pumps sold with induction motors. As 
such, DOE is finalizing the pump test procedure as proposed in the 
April 2022 NOPR, to be based on motor and inverter efficiency rather 
than motor only efficiency. DOE acknowledges that there will be a 
period of time in which motor and inverter efficiency is not required 
to be published by motor manufacturers, however, DOE is also declining 
to develop an interim test procedure. This approach will limit 
potential deviation between interim ratings and any ratings post motor-
standard, should one be finalized, which could cause market confusion, 
and will allow pump manufacturers to use motor and inverter data when 
available. Now that the DOE motors test procedure is final, there is 
more certainty in the market than there was at the time of the April 
2022 NOPR, and motor manufacturers may choose to make representations 
early or upon request of their customers. DOE notes that many motor 
manufacturers are currently making representations regarding the energy 
efficiency of their inverter-only synchronous electric motors, and in 
order to continue doing so after the 180-day mark, those 
representations must be of motor and inverter efficiency in accordance 
with the DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE expects such information to 
be relatively widely available. DOE is also finalizing an AEDM option 
for pumps, as discussed in section III.I.2. With this option, pump 
manufacturers may use their own calculation method, relying on any 
available data and coefficients they have, including potentially HI or 
NEEA's recommended approach, as long as such calculation meets the AEDM 
requirements, as discussed in section III.1.2. In addition, as DOE 
received no comment on the coefficients excluding the request to base 
them on motor-only efficiency, DOE is finalizing the coefficients as 
proposed.
b. Denominator for PEI Metric
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that the appropriate denominator 
for pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors is the 
same as for other pumps sold with motors with or without controls 
(i.e., the efficiency standards for NEMA Design B motors in 10 CFR 
431.25 is comparable to the PEI metric when comparing pumps across a 
common baseline). 87 FR 21268, 21298. Consequently, DOE did not propose 
a revision to the calculation of PERSTD for these pumps. Id.
    DOE received no comments on this issue and is finalizing the 
denominator as proposed.
c. Applicability
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that, to the extent that the 
calculation-based method would be applicable to pumps sold with 
synchronous electric motors that are inverter-only electric motors, 
such provision would apply to pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous 
electric motors both with and without controls. 87 FR 21268, 21299. DOE 
also proposed that pumps sold with inverter-only motors with or without 
controls would apply the testing-based approach in section VI of 
appendix A (for pumps sold with motors and controls) rather than in 
section IV of appendix A (for pumps sold with motors), given that 
section VI results in PEIVL, and DOE assumed that such 
pumps, even if sold without an inverter, would be tested with an 
inverter. Id. DOE requested comment on its proposal to apply 
PEIVL to pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous motors 
without controls, including application of the testing method in 
section VI of appendix A and the calculation method in section VII of 
appendix A. Id.
    Grundfos agreed with the proposal. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) HI 
agreed with the proposal to apply PEIVL ratings to pumps 
sold with inverter-only synchronous motors without controls, assuming 
they would use section VII of appendix A. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) However, 
HI disagreed with section VII.A.2, ``Pumps sold with inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors regulated by DOE's energy conservation 
standards in subpart B of this part,'' stating that DOE should allow 
use of the calculation method using IE4 efficiency from IEC 60034-30-1, 
since most (if not all) synchronous inverter-only motors will meet the 
IE4 level. Id. HI also disagreed with sections V.A.2 and VII.A.3, 
``SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by DOE's energy 
conservation standards at Sec.  431.446 or with small non-small-
electric-motor electric motors (``SNEMs'') regulated by DOE's energy 
conservation standards in subpart B of this part (but including motors 
of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and continuous 
controls,'' stating that DOE should continue to allow use of the 
calculation method for non-DOE regulated small or SNEM motors as 
referenced in previous comments by creating coefficients specific to 
these motor types for section VII calculations. Id.
    Based on the comments received, DOE is finalizing its proposal to 
apply PEIVL to pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous 
motors without controls, including application of the testing method in 
section VI of appendix A and the calculation method in section VII of 
appendix A. DOE has addressed HI's concern with respect to their 
proposed IE4-based calculation method in section III.F.3.a of this 
document and discusses the concern regarding small or SNEM motors in 
section III.G of this document.
4. Pumps Sold With Submersible Motors
    For pumps sold with submersible motors, the calculation of 
PERSTD, the test procedure for bare pumps, the calculation-
based approach for pumps

[[Page 17958]]

sold with motors, and the calculation-based approach for pumps sold 
with motors and controls all include reference to Table 2 of appendix 
A, which includes default nominal full-load submersible motor 
efficiency values. These motor efficiency values were developed to 
allow for pumps sold with submersible motors to be rated using 
calculation-based methods despite the fact that submersible motors are 
not included in DOE's current motor regulations. In the Motors TP NOPR, 
DOE proposed a test procedure for submersible motors based on section 
34.4 of NEMA MG1-2016 with its 2018 Supplements. 86 FR 71725, 71749-
71750. DOE noted in the April 2022 NOPR that it had not established 
energy conservation standards for submersible motors, and that were DOE 
to establish a test procedure for submersible motors, such motors would 
not be required to be tested according to the DOE test procedure until 
such time that compliance with any energy conservation standards that 
DOE may establish is required. 87 FR 21268, 21299.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that for the calculation-based 
approaches for submersible pumps sold with motors (with or without 
controls), for determination of PERCL and PERVL, 
the default efficiency values in Table 2 of appendix A would be used 
until compliance with an energy conservation standard for submersible 
motors is required, should such a standard be established. 87 FR 21268, 
21299. At such time, calculation of the pump efficiency for submersible 
pumps would rely on the motor efficiency rating marked on the nameplate 
and tested in accordance with the relevant DOE test procedure. Id. DOE 
further proposed that if DOE finalized a test procedure for submersible 
pumps, prior to any required compliance with an energy conservation 
standard that DOE may establish for these pumps, a manufacturer may 
rely on the motor efficiency represented by the motor manufacturer, if 
such a representation were made, or the default values in Table 2 of 
appendix A. Id.
    DOE also proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that when determining 
PERSTD using the calculation-based approach for bare pumps, 
before the compliance date of any future standards for submersible 
electric motors that publishes after January 1, 2021, the default 
efficiency values in Table 2 of appendix A would be used. 87 FR 21268, 
21299-21300. After the compliance date of any standards for submersible 
electric motors that publishes after January 1, 2021, any standards 
applicable to submersible motors in appendix B of part 431 would be 
used. 87 FR 21268, 21300. DOE requested comment on its proposal for the 
calculation-based approach for pumps sold with submersible pumps to 
require use of the rated motor efficiency marked on the nameplate that 
has been tested in accordance with the relevant DOE test procedure 
after such time as compliance is required with an energy conservation 
standard for submersible motors, should such a standard be established. 
Id.
    Grundfos commented that this approach would be in line with the 
current requirements for pump testing using DOE regulated product and 
agreed with the approach. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) However, Grundfos 
stated that Section 34.4 of NEMA MG1-2016 is an inadequate test 
procedure for submersible motors. Id.
    HI responded that, consistent with its comments on the Motors TP 
NOPR, which stated that the proposed submersible motor test procedure 
was inadequate, it does not believe this language is warranted at this 
time. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) Thus, HI recommended that no changes to the 
test procedure for pumps sold with submersible motors be made at this 
time. Id.
    In the Motors TP Final Rule, DOE did not finalize a test procedure 
for submersible motors. 87 FR 63588, 63605. However, DOE notes that the 
proposed provision in the pumps test procedure relates to any future 
standards for submersible motors, and as Grundfos stated, the approach 
is in line with the current requirements for pump testing with motors 
covered by DOE. As such, DOE is finalizing the provision as proposed, 
noting that it will have no impact if and until a future motors 
rulemaking adopts a test procedure and/or standard for submersible 
motors.

G. Test Procedure for SVIL Pumps

    In this final rule, DOE is expanding the scope of the test 
procedure to include SVIL pumps. DOE reviewed the general pumps test 
procedure as finalized in this rule to determine if any modifications 
were necessary to accommodate SVIL pumps. The amended test procedure is 
based on the test methods contained in HI 40.6-2021, which DOE has 
determined also applies to SVIL pumps.
    As discussed in section III.F, the general pumps test procedure 
also contains methods to determine the appropriate PEI using either 
calculation-based methods or testing-based methods. DOE has determined 
that these calculation- and testing-based methods are applicable to 
SVIL pumps just as they are applicable to IL pumps, based on the 
configuration in which the pump is being sold (i.e., since SVIL pumps 
are sold as pumps with motors or pumps with motors and controls, the 
test methods enumerated in Table 1 to Appendix A apply to SVIL pumps). 
Additionally, the determination of pump performance in the pumps test 
procedure, as amended in this final rule, would be appropriate for SVIL 
pumps.
1. Applicable Motor Regulations
    The primary differences between SVIL and IL pumps affecting the 
application of DOE's general pumps test procedure are the size and 
certain characteristics of the motor with which the SVIL pumps are 
rated. DOE notes that SVIL pumps, which this final rule defines as 
pumps having shaft input power less than 1 hp, may be paired with 
motors that are less than 1 hp and, as such, are not subject to DOE's 
electric motor regulations specified at 10 CFR 431.25. However, some 
motors less than 1 hp are subject to DOE's small electric motor 
regulations specified at 10 CFR 431.446.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that its motor regulations at 10 
CFR 431.446 exclude totally enclosed fan-cooled electric motors 
(``TEFC'') and certain other motors considered to be non-general 
purpose motors, which pump manufacturers had noted are frequently 
paired with SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21301. DOE stated that in the 
Motors TP NOPR, it had proposed adding such motors to the scope of 
electric motors coverage under the term small non-small electric motor 
electric motors (``SNEMs''). Specifically, DOE proposed to define SNEMs 
as agnostic to enclosure and topology, affirmatively stating that the 
proposed test procedure would apply to general-purpose, definite-
purpose, and special-purpose motors. As proposed, SNEMs would include 
fractional horsepower motors as low as 0.25 hp. 86 FR 71710, 71721-
71725. The Motors TP NOPR also proposed testing instructions specific 
to these motors. 86 FR 71710, 71739. DOE noted that it had not 
established energy conservation standards for SNEMs, and that were DOE 
to establish a test procedure for SNEMs, such motors would not be 
required to test according to the DOE test procedure until such time as 
compliance with any energy conservation standards be required, should 
such standards be established. Under DOE's Motors TP NOPR, any 
definitions, test procedures, and standards finalized for SNEMs would 
be in found in subpart B of part 431. 87 FR 21268, 21301.

[[Page 17959]]

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that it expected that the 
proposed definition and test procedure for SNEMs, as well as the 
proposed test procedure for inverter-only synchronous electric motors, 
as discussed in section III.F.3, would encompass the additional types 
of motors discussed by stakeholders that are not currently covered by 
the standards at 10 CFR 431.446. Therefore, DOE proposed that where the 
calculation-based test methods refer to the ``represented nominal full-
load motor efficiency (i.e., nameplate/DOE-certified value),'' the 
nominal full-load motor efficiency for an SVIL pump would be determined 
in accordance with the applicable test procedure in 10 CFR 431.444 or 
in subpart B of part 431.87 FR 21268, 21301.
    DOE also proposed that for SVIL pumps, the determination of 
PERSTD would reference DOE's small electric motor 
regulations at 10 CFR 431.446 rather than the electric motor 
regulations at 10 CFR 431.25, and would be the minimum efficiency of 
the energy conservation standards for polyphase or single-phase (CSIR/
CSCR) for the relevant number of poles and motor horsepower. 87 FR 
21268, 21301. The single-phase standards only apply to CSCR and CSIR 
but the proposal would apply the efficiency values found at 10 CFR 
431.446 when determining an SVIL pump's PERSTD. Id. DOE 
stated that it believed that these values represent an appropriate 
default for the SVIL market. Id. DOE also stated that it would also 
consider application of efficiency values found for specific SNEMs in 
subpart B of part 431, if the relevant proposed amendments contained in 
the Motors TP NOPR were finalized. Id. DOE stated that its information 
did not indicate that SVIL pumps are sold as bare pumps, but that if 
stakeholders identify such models, DOE would include these same 
provisions in the calculation method for bare pumps. Id.
    DOE sought comment on whether the efficiency standards found at 10 
CFR 431.446 are appropriate for use in the determination of PERSTD for 
SVILs, whether certain motor topologies that would be classified as 
SNEM are more prevalent and significantly less efficient, and whether 
the minimum efficiency of the polyphase and CSCR/CSIR standards for the 
relevant number of poles and motor horsepower is appropriate or whether 
there should be differences depending on the phase of the motor with 
which the pump is sold. 87 FR 21268, 21301.
    HI and Grundfos stated that motor efficiencies found in 10 CFR 
431.446 are not the lowest for topologies used in SVIL pumps and are 
inappropriate for determining PERSTD for SVIL products. (HI, 
No. 33 at p. 7; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) HI and Grundfos stated that 
DOE must create a minimum efficiency table, similar to that created for 
submersible motors, to capture the minimums across the motor sizes 
covered by the SVIL products. Id.
    NEEA supported DOE's recommendation for the test procedure for 
SVILs, but stated that they were concerned that the SNEM rulemaking 
will not conclude in sufficient time to allow for incorporation of 
those test procedures and standards into this rulemaking, creating a 
gap during which manufacturers would not have a calculation-based 
approach. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) NEEA recommended that DOE add an 
additional calculation-based approach for SVIL pumps sold with motors 
not covered by the motors standard or test procedure at 10 CFR 431.446. 
Id. NEEA recommended that DOE embed a calculation approach for SVILs 
that uses IE2 efficiency levels to determine full load motor 
efficiency, as described in IEC 60034-30-1. Id. NEEA stated that these 
values are appropriate because the motors are not currently covered by 
a standard, so a conservative value would use an efficiency level below 
the standard for covered motors of similar sizes, and would not 
disadvantage manufacturers that choose to wire-to-water test equipment. 
Id. NEEA stated that once any motor TP or standard is in place and 
covering additional motor types, the embedded calculation-based 
methodology would no longer be valid. Id.
    Following receipt of comments, DOE published the Motors TP final 
rule, which adopted a test procedure for SNEMs in appendix B to subpart 
B of part 431.87 FR 63588, 63657-63660. However, DOE has yet to adopt 
any energy conservation standards for SNEM. As a result, there are not 
currently minimum efficiency values for SNEMs on which DOE could base 
the calculation of PERSTD for SVIL.
    DOE acknowledges that in the proposed approach, SVIL paired with 
SNEM may have worse PER ratings than SVIL paired with small electric 
motors (``SEM''), given that some SNEMs currently have lower efficiency 
that DOE's minimum requirements for SEMs. However, this is 
representative of the energy use of such an SVIL. In addition, DOE 
notes that the test procedure does not set a standard for SVIL, and 
that any calculated PERSTD is just a reference point. If or 
when DOE considers setting standards for SVIL, DOE may consider a PEI 
other than 1.00 as appropriate for this equipment category--depending 
on the timing and finalization of any DOE standards related to SNEM, 
and the relationship of SNEM to SEM minimum efficiency. Therefore, HI 
and Grundfos' concern regarding the lower efficiency of SNEM as 
compared to SEM can be ameliorated. DOE acknowledges that motor 
manufacturers will not be required to publish full-load motor 
efficiency for a given SNEM until the compliance date of any standards 
for SNEM. However, DOE is declining to develop an interim approach as 
suggested by NEEA, and is adopting the provisions for motor efficiency 
in SVIL calculations as proposed. As discussed regarding inverter-only 
motors in section III.F.3, this approach will limit potential deviation 
between interim ratings and ratings post motor-standard, if any, which 
could cause market confusion, and will allow manufacturers to use SNEM 
motor efficiency when available. Now that the DOE motors test procedure 
is final, there is more certainty in the market than there was at the 
time of the April 2022 NOPR, and motor manufacturers may choose to make 
representations in accordance with the DOE test procedure early such as 
at the request of customers, or if they are already making 
representations of energy use or energy efficiency and wish to continue 
doing so past the 180 day mark following publication of the DOE motors 
test procedure. DOE is also finalizing an AEDM option for pumps, as 
discussed in section III.I.2 of this document. With this option, pump 
manufacturers may use their own calculation method, relying on any 
available data and coefficients they have, including potentially NEEA's 
recommended approach, as long as such calculation meets the AEDM 
requirements, as discussed in section III.1.2.
    Since the April 2022 NOPR, DOE has also determined through 
manufacturer interviews that a small percent of pumps are sold as bare 
pumps. Therefore, DOE is adopting the same provisions relevant to SVIL 
in the calculation method for bare pumps.
2. SVIL Paired With Motors Less Than 0.25 Horsepower
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that its market research 
indicates that the vast majority of SVILs are sold with motors with a 
nominal horsepower of 0.25 hp or greater. 87 FR 21268, 21301. However, 
DOE identified some models with horsepower closer to 0.125 hp. Id. Such 
motors are not subject to the standards in 10 CFR 431.446 and are not 
proposed to be subject to any test procedure in the Motors TP NOPR. Id.

[[Page 17960]]

DOE proposed that for determination of PERSTD for SVILs sold 
with a motor nominal horsepower of less than 0.25 hp, the full-load 
efficiency values in Table III.3 would be used. Id. DOE scaled these 
values from the standards for 0.25 hp pumps (3.9 efficiency point 
decrease, comparable to the most common decrease from 0.33 to 0.25 hp) 
and taken the minimum value across polyphase and CSCR/CSIR motors. Id. 
DOE also proposed that the nominal full-load motor efficiency for SVILs 
would be determined in accordance with the applicable test procedure in 
10 CFR 431.444 or in subpart B of part 431, although such test 
procedure is not required for those motors. Id. DOE stated that it may 
consider alternate methods of determining motor efficiency for motors 
less than 0.25 hp, or if there is no appropriate test procedure, DOE 
may consider requiring SVILs sold with such motors to use a testing-
based approach. Id. DOE sought comment on: (1) how many models of SVILs 
are sold with motors with a nominal horsepower less than 0.25 hp, (2) 
whether such motors could be tested in accordance with the relevant 
test procedures in 10 CFR 431.446 or proposed in the Motors TP NOPR, 
and if not, how such motors are tested, and (3) whether the efficiency 
values in Table III.3 are appropriate for such motors, and if not, how 
those values should be determined. Id.

                      Table III.3--Average Full Load Efficiency for SVILs Less Than 0.25 hp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Average full-load efficiency
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
                       Motor horsepower                                  Open motors (number of poles)
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
                                                                      6                4                2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<0.25........................................................            58.3             64.6             61.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Grundfos stated that SVIL sales data was provided as part of the 
manufacturer interview process. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7-8) For 
testing of motors, Grundfos suggested DOE implement the process the EU 
follows by publishing coefficients for these motors and allowing for 
development of manufacturer specified coefficients, where required. Id. 
Grundfos stated that Table III.3 using a 3.9 percent decrease is 
insufficient and again recommended that DOE create a minimum efficiency 
table like that for submersible motors. Id.
    HI recommended that DOE reference manufacturer interviews with 
regard to sales data. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) HI did not agree with DOE's 
methodology for Part 3 and the limited topologies used in the scaling. 
Id. HI noted that this approach misses less efficient motor topologies 
that are selected because the product's market price point. Id.
    China stated that DOE did not specify the number of motor phases 
applicable to SVILs less than 0.25 hp, and suggested that DOE clarify 
the phase requirement for these motors and set up separate energy 
efficiency indicators for motors with different phase numbers. (China, 
No. 29 at p. 4)
    Given that DOE is adopting the efficiencies found in 10 CFR 431.446 
as discussed in section III.G.1, and for the reasons discussed in that 
section, DOE is also adopting the proposed efficiencies derived from 
those values as shown in Table III.3. This will allow the ratings for 
SVIL with motors less than 0.25 hp to be rated consistently with SVIL 
with larger motors.
    DOE notes that neither Grundfos nor HI explicitly stated whether 
such motors could be tested in accordance with the relevant test 
procedures in 10 CFR 431.446 or proposed in the Motors TP NOPR. 
Grundfos suggested that DOE publish coefficients and allow for 
manufacturer specified coefficients, where necessary. (Grundfos, No. 31 
at p. 7-8) DOE does not have data available with which to develop 
default efficiency values for these motors. In addition, DOE notes that 
manufacturers have the ability to develop their own coefficients using 
an AEDM approach, as discussed in section III.I. For this reason, DOE 
is adopting its proposal that the nominal full-load motor efficiency 
for SVILs would be determined in accordance with the applicable test 
procedure in 10 CFR 431.444 or in subpart B of part 431. DOE notes that 
if this value is not available, manufacturers may choose to wire-to-
water test and/or to use an AEDM.
    In response to China, the test procedure proposed in the April 2022 
NOPR and adopted in this final rule does not restrict the number of 
phases for motors paired with SVILs.
3. SVIL Paired With Other Motors Not Covered by DOE Regulations
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that it expected that the 
existing regulations for small electric motors at 10 CFR 431.446, as 
well as any finalized regulations for SNEMs and inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors, would account for the vast majority of 
motors sold with SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21302. However, DOE proposed 
that any SVIL pumps that are distributed in commerce with motors that 
are not regulated by DOE's electric motor regulations at 10 CFR 431.25, 
DOE's small electric motor regulations at 10 CFR 431.446, or any 
electric motor regulations in subpart B to part 431 established after 
January 1, 2022, as applicable, would need to apply the testing-based 
methods currently specified in sections IV and VI of appendix A and as 
proposed to be modified in the proposed rule. Id. Given that DOE 
proposed for PERSTD to reference motor efficiencies relevant 
to SVIL pumps, DOE proposed not to have an option for SVIL pumps sold 
with single-phase motors to be rated as bare pumps. Id.
    If regulations for SNEMs and inverter-only synchronous electric 
motors are not set, DOE stated that it may consider allowing an option 
for SVIL pumps sold with single-phase motors to be rated as bare pumps. 
In this case, DOE would reference the efficiency values in 10 CFR 
431.446 to determine bare pump performance. 87 FR 21268, 21302.
    DOE sought comment on its proposal to require testing of SVIL pumps 
distributed in commerce with motors not regulated by DOE's current 
electric motor regulations or any motor regulations finalized after 
January 1, 2022. 87 FR 21268, 21302. DOE also sought comment on whether 
it should allow such pumps to be rated as bare pumps only if any motor 
regulations finalized after January 1, 2022, do not include SNEMs and 
inverter-only synchronous electric motors. Id.
    Grundfos stated that DOE should consider the impact of this 
mandatory testing-based approach if motor regulations are not finalized 
for motors used in SVIL products. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8) Grundfos 
added that the testing burden would exceed the burden the inverter-only 
calculation method was created to eliminate, due to the

[[Page 17961]]

basic model `band rule' and varying motor topologies used in SVIL. Id.
    HI disagreed with sections V.A.2 and VII.A.3 and recommended that 
DOE should continue to allow the calculation method for non-DOE 
regulated small, SNEM motors, or inverter-only motors by creating 
coefficients specific to these motor types for Section VII calculation. 
(HI, No. 33 at p. 8)
    Following comments received on the April 2022 NOPR, DOE published 
the Motors TP Final Rule, which adopted test procedures for SNEM and 
inverter-only synchronous motors in Appendix B to Subpart B of part 
431. 87 FR 63588, 63657-63660. At the time of publication of this final 
rule, DOE has not adopted any energy conservation standards for SNEM or 
inverter-only synchronous motors. As discussed, DOE believes that the 
test procedures for SEM, SNEM, and inverter-only synchronous motors 
would account for the vast majority of motors sold with SVIL pumps. For 
this reason, DOE adopts its proposal to limit the calculation methods 
to SVIL sold with motors subject to a DOE test procedure, and to 
require testing of SVIL pumps distributed in commerce with motors not 
regulated by DOE's current electric motor regulations or any motor test 
procedure and/or energy conservation standards finalized after January 
1, 2022. DOE notes that such SVIL pumps could also be rated using an 
AEDM, as discussed in section III.I of this document.
4. Part-Load Loss Curves
    As stated in section III.F.1, the general pumps test procedure 
includes calculation-based methods that specify part-load loss curves 
for pumps sold with motors, accounting for the part-load losses of the 
motor at each load point, as well as part-load loss curves for pumps 
sold with motors and continuous controls, which account for additional 
losses.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that it understood that part-
load loss curves (i.e., the variation in efficiency as a function of 
load) do not vary significantly between 1 hp motors and drives and 
motors and drives that are less than 1 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21302. DOE 
stated that it did not receive any newer data or any indication that 
the SVIL market has changed such that data collected in 2017 would no 
longer be applicable. Id. DOE did not propose to revise its part-load 
loss curves for motors and drives less than 5 hp. Therefore, DOE 
proposed to apply the existing motor and combined motor and drive part-
load loss curves that are applicable to 1 hp motors and drives to the 
fractional horsepower motors and drives with which SVIL pumps may be 
sold. Id. DOE noted that IEC standards do not include motors below \3/
4\ kw (1 hp), and that many SVIL pumps may use integrated packages 
rather than separate motors and drives--and may be specific to each 
manufacturer. Id. Consequently, there may be more variation in losses 
across manufacturers or models compared to larger hp motors and drives. 
Id. As discussed in section III.I.2, DOE proposed to allow use of AEDMs 
for pumps. DOE stated that in cases where a manufacturer wishes to use 
an alternative to the part-load loss coefficient method, it may choose 
to perform wire-to-water testing of SVILs or employ an AEDM under DOE's 
proposal. Id.
    DOE sought comment on whether the market for SVIL pumps has changed 
such that the data collected by DOE in 2017 would no longer be 
applicable, and whether the use of AEDM would address concerns related 
to part-load loss curves specific to low-horsepower motors. 87 FR 
21268, 21302.
    Grundfos stated that data was submitted as part of the manufacturer 
interview process. (Grundfos, No .31 at p. 8) Grundfos added that 
because the calculated method should remain, allowing AEDM will not 
solve the issue of part-load loss curves for SVIL products in the short 
term. Id.
    HI did not believe the market has changed since 2017, but suggested 
that DOE consider manufacturer interviews. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) HI 
recommended that DOE conduct research on the part load loss factors for 
these lower horsepower motors to inform the calculation method. Id. HI 
stated that the use of AEDM to improve the part load loss calculation 
would increase burden compared to a calculation method. Id.
    NEEA recommended that DOE rely on market data already in its 
possession from previous rulemaking proceedings. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) 
NEEA stated that this data, made public in 2017, is recent enough that 
it represents the current market for this pump class. Id. NEEA stated 
that considering the viability of DOE's data and similarity to covered 
pump classes, there is no reason to delay this rulemaking further with 
an additional round of data acquisition and analysis. Id. NEEA 
recommended that DOE proceed with data from 2017. Id.
    DOE has not received any additional data indicating that the part-
load loss curves for SVIL with motors less than 1 hp should be any 
different than those for SVIL paired with1 hp motors. Therefore, DOE is 
finalizing the part-load loss curve as proposed, consistent with NEEA's 
suggestion. Regarding HI and Grundfos' concern with the added burden of 
an AEDM as compared to a calculation approach, as discussed previously, 
an AEDM could be as simple as the calculation method that includes 
different part load loss coefficients. If such data are available to 
manufacturers, there should be no additional burden. If such data are 
not available, manufacturers can rely on the calculation method.

H. Test Procedure for Other Expanded Scope Pumps

    DOE has evaluated the amended test procedure as proposed in the 
April 2022 NOPR to determine if modifications are necessary to 
accommodate RSH, and VT pumps, pumps designed to operate with 6-pole 
induction motors, and pumps designed to operate with non-induction 
motors with an operating range greater than or equal to 960 rpm and 
less than 1,440 rpm (``pumps tested with a nominal speed of 1,200 
rpm''). 87 FR 21268, 21302-21303.
1. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps to HI 40.6
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that the amended 
test procedure is applicable to BB, RSH, and VT pumps, as well as to 
pumps tested with a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm for determining pump 
performance. 87 FR 21268, 21302. As discussed in section III.C.1, DOE 
is updating its test procedure to reference HI 40.6-2021. In the April 
2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposed test procedure for BB, 
RSH, and VT pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303. Grundfos agreed that the 
proposed test procedure for BB, RSH, and VT pumps is appropriate. 
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8) HI commented that, in general, BB, RSH, and 
VT pumps can be tested using HI 40.6-2021 without modification. (HI, 
No. 33 at p. 1, 8) HI also commented that HI 40.6-2021 is fully 
applicable to VS1 and VS3 \35\ pump types. (HI, No. 33 at pp. 2-3) HI 
stated that in general, for any discharge through column pump, DOE must 
focus on bowl or pump efficiency that excludes the column friction 
losses and line-shaft bearing losses. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ VS1 and VS3 pumps are HI pump categories that meet the DOE 
definition of a vertical turbine pump.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    China recommended that DOE use the current test procedure for 
testing RSH pumps since RSH pumps work similarly to RSV pumps. (China, 
No. 29 at p. 4) DOE interprets the comment from China to mean that the 
test procedure for RSV pumps should be identical to that for

[[Page 17962]]

RSH pumps, which is consistent with DOE's proposal in the April 2022 
NOPR.
    The CA IOUs and China agreed that HI 40.6-2021, as written, can be 
used to test between bearing pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3; China, 
No. 29 at p. 4) HI explained that there are two industry definitions 
for determining specific speed that potentially apply to BB pumps. (HI, 
No. 33 at p. 1) HI encouraged DOE to clarify in its data gathering for 
BB pumps that BEP flow rate used to determine specific speed for 
double-inlet impellers products is calculated using BEP flow divided by 
2. Id. Further, HI stated that BB1 pumps are not as abundant as other 
in-scope pumps, and there will be limited samples available for testing 
of basic models. Id.
    DOE acknowledges that VT pumps are sold in many configurations, 
making it unrealistic to consider all potential shaft depths during 
testing. To clarify DOE's intent and to reduce unnecessary test burden, 
DOE is therefore revising the test procedure language proposed in the 
April 2022 NOPR to explicitly state that when testing VT pumps, only 
the bowl performance should be measured, as specified in section 
40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    Since DOE is not including BB pumps in the scope of this test 
procedure, DOE is not adopting any changes to the calculation of 
specific speed.
    Aside from the minor revisions discussed in the preceding 
paragraphs, DOE is adopting the remainder of the test procedures for 
RSH, and VT pumps, as well as to pumps tested with a nominal speed of 
1,200 rpm as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps With Motors
    As discussed in section III.F, the pumps test procedure contains 
methods for determining PEI using either a calculation-based or a 
testing-based method. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively 
determined that these calculation- and testing-based methods are 
applicable to BB, RSH, and VT pumps, as well as pumps tested with a 
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm and would be applied in the same way that 
they are applied to other pumps. DOE understands that the motors paired 
with BB, RSH, and VT pumps are typically similar to those paired with 
pumps that are currently in scope. 87 FR 21268, 21302. As such, DOE 
tentatively determined that Table 1 and the relevant test and 
calculation options are appropriate for these expanded scope pumps and 
that no modifications are needed. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether motors 
typically sold with BB, RSH and VT pumps are subject to DOE's electric 
motor standards. 87 FR 21268, 21303. See 10 CFR 431.25. In response, HI 
agreed that the motors sold with BB, RSH, and VT pumps are currently 
regulated motors, and that Table 1 with relevant calculation and 
testing options are appropriate. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8).
    DOE has determined that Table 1 and the relevant test and 
calculation options as adopted in this final rule are appropriate for 
these expanded scope pumps.
    In the April 2022 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that the existing 
test procedure references to 10 CFR 431.25 for nominal full load motor 
efficiencies are appropriate for 6-pole motors since 10 CFR 431.25 
includes efficiencies for 6-pole motors. 87 FR 21268, 21303. 
Additionally, DOE determined that the part-load loss factors in Table 4 
of appendix A, as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR are appropriate. Id. 
As a result, DOE did not propose to revise these references and part 
load loss factors.
    The current DOE test procedure references Table 2 of appendix A for 
determining default full load submersible motor efficiencies. Table 2 
does not currently provide default full load submersible motor 
efficiencies for 6-pole motors. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to 
expand Table 2 to include such values. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
    DOE requested comment on its proposed default submersible motor 
efficiency values for 6-pole motors in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 
21268, 21303. In response, HI stated it does not have sufficient data 
to provide a response since the number of 6-pole ST pumps sold is very 
small and it does not expect that regulating 6-pole ST pumps will 
result in any measurable energy savings (HI, No. 33 at p. 8).
    DOE did not receive any alternative 6-pole motor coefficients or 
data to support the development of 6-pole submersible motor 
coefficients. As such, DOE is adopting the 6-pole submersible motor 
coefficients as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. As discussed in 
section III.F.3, Table 2 may be replaced with energy conservation 
standard values for submersible motors if such standards are ever 
developed and adopted.
    DOE acknowledges that ST pumps that use 6-pole motors are not 
common; however, to ensure consistent coverage across ST pump families, 
prevent potential loopholes, and provide consumers with information to 
compare the performance of these pumps, DOE is including them in the 
scope of this test procedure. DOE will evaluate potential energy 
savings in the ongoing pumps energy conservation standards rulemaking.

I. Sampling Plan, AEDMs, Enforcement Provisions, and Basic Model

1. Sampling Plan for Determining Represented Values
    DOE currently provides sampling plans for all covered equipment 
that manufacturers must use when certifying their equipment as 
compliant with the relevant standards and when making written 
representations of energy consumption and efficiency. (See generally 10 
CFR parts 429 and 431) In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that SVIL, 
RSH, VT, and BB pumps are expected to have the same testing uncertainty 
and manufacturing variability as IL, RSV, ST and end-suction pumps, 
respectively, since they are similar in construction and design and 
would apply the same test procedure under DOE's proposal. 87 FR 21268, 
21303. Additionally, DOE discussed in the April 2022 NOPR that it 
expects pumps tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm would have the 
same testing uncertainty and manufacturing variability as pumps that 
are currently regulated and tested at nominal speeds of 1,800 rpm and 
3,600 rpm. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether SVIL, BB, 
RSH, VT, and pumps tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm have the same 
testing uncertainty and manufacturing variability as currently 
regulated pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303. DOE also requested comment on its 
proposal to adopt the same statistical sampling plans which are 
currently in place for commercial industrial pumps for SVIL, BB, RSH, 
VT, and pumps tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm. Id.
    HI and Grundfos agreed that testing uncertainty and manufacturing 
variability are similar for expanded-scope pumps and for those 
currently in scope, and that it is reasonable to adopt the same 
statistical sampling plans for the expanded-scope pumps. (HI, No. 33 at 
p. 8; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8)
    In this final rule, DOE is adopting the statistical sampling plans 
for expanded-scope pumps (i.e., SVIL, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps) as 
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
    For purposes of certification testing, determining whether a basic 
model complies with the applicable energy conservation standard is 
based on

[[Page 17963]]

testing using the DOE test procedure and sampling plan. The general 
sampling requirement currently applicable to all covered products and 
equipment provides that a sample of sufficient size must be randomly 
selected and tested to ensure compliance and that, unless otherwise 
specified, a minimum of two units must be tested to certify a basic 
model as compliant. 10 CFR 429.11. This minimum is implicit in the 
requirement to calculate a mean--an average--that requires at least two 
values. However, if only one unit of a basic model is produced, that 
single unit must be tested, and the test results must demonstrate that 
the basic model performs at or better than the applicable standards. 
Id. Subsequently, if one or more units of the basic model are 
manufactured, compliance with the default sampling and representations 
provisions is required. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to expand the requirements in 
10 CFR 429.11 to SVIL, BB, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps. 87 FR 21268, 
21303. DOE discussed that manufacturers may need to test a sample of 
more than two units depending on the variability of their sample, as 
provided by the statistical sampling plan. Id.
    Additionally, the current certification requirements state that 
other performance parameters derived from the test procedure must be 
reported, but provides no sampling plan for these other parameters, 
which include: pump total head in feet at BEP and nominal speed, volume 
per unit time (i.e., flow rate) in gallons per minute at BEP and 
nominal speed, and calculated driver power input at each load point 
(i.e., corrected to nominal speed in horsepower). 10 CFR 429.59(b)(2).
    Regarding representative values other than PEI and PER, DOE 
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that if more than one unit is tested 
for a given sample, represented values (other than PEI and PER) would 
be determined using the arithmetic mean of the individual units. 87 FR 
21268, 21303. For example, if three units are tested for a given 
sample, and pump total head at BEP is measured at 99.1 ft, 96.2 ft, and 
97.3 ft, the reported values for head would be the sum of the three 
values divided by three (i.e., 97.5 ft). Id. This proposal applied to 
both the existing and proposed expanded scope of pumps that would be 
addressed by the pumps test procedure. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposed 
statistical sampling procedures and representation requirements for 
SVIL, BB, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303. Grundfos 
agreed with the proposal. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) HI stated that 
1,200 rpm pumps will take longer and cost more to manufacture and test 
since they are physically larger pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) HI 
additionally commented that two samples will not be available for test 
in many cases, in which case published data will be the result of a 
single sample. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) As discussed previously, the 
language in 10 CFR 429.11 addresses the sampling plan for a basic model 
when only a single sample is available for test. Further, as discussed 
in section III.I.2, DOE is adopting AEDM provisions that allow a pump 
manufacturer to certify basic models, including low-volume basic 
models, using a validated AEDM.
    In this final rule, DOE is adopting the statistical sampling 
procedures and representation requirements for SVIL, RSH, VT, and 1,200 
rpm pumps as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. Since DOE is not 
including BB pumps in the scope of this test procedure, DOE is not 
adopting statistical sampling procedures for them.
2. Alternative Efficiency Determination Methods
    Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 429.70, DOE may permit use 
of an AEDM in cases where actual testing of regulated equipment may 
present considerable burdens to a manufacturer and use of that AEDM can 
reasonably predict the equipment's energy efficiency performance. 
Although specific requirements vary by product or equipment, use of an 
AEDM entails development of a mathematical model that estimates energy 
efficiency or energy consumption characteristics of the basic model, as 
would be measured by the applicable DOE test procedure. The AEDM must 
be based on engineering or statistical analysis, computer simulation or 
modeling, or other analytic evaluation of performance data. A 
manufacturer must validate an AEDM by demonstrating that its predicted 
efficiency performance of the evaluated equipment agrees with the 
performance as measured by actual testing in accordance with the 
applicable DOE test procedure. The validation procedure and 
requirements, including the statistical tolerance, number of basic 
models, and number of units tested vary by product.
    Once developed, an AEDM may be used to represent the performance of 
untested basic models in lieu of physical testing. Use of an AEDM for 
any basic model is optional. One potential advantage of an AEDM is that 
it may free a manufacturer from the burden of physical testing--but 
this advantage must be weighed against the potential risk that an AEDM 
may not perfectly predict performance and could result in a finding 
that the equipment has an invalid rating and/or that the manufacturer 
has distributed a noncompliant basic model. The manufacturer, by using 
an AEDM, bears the responsibility and risk of the validity of the 
ratings, including cases where the manufacturer receives and relies on 
performance data for certain components from a component manufacturer.
    Given stakeholder requests for the calculation methods to be more 
representative, and to balance the risk of allowing overrating through 
calculation methods, DOE proposed allowing manufacturers to use AEDMs 
to determine performance ratings for pumps in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 
FR 21268, 21304. DOE requested feedback regarding all aspects of its 
proposal to permit use of an AEDM for pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21305. DOE 
specifically sought comment on its proposed validation classes, and 
whether groupings should be considered where performance variation 
between two equipment classes or nominal speeds is well established. 
Id. In addition, DOE requested comment on whether the calculation-based 
methods would still be necessary if manufacturers were permitted to use 
AEDMs in addition to physical testing. Id.
    In the NOPR public meeting, ebm-pabst asked if it is possible to 
keep AEDM information proprietary between the manufacturer and DOE or 
if it would be public knowledge. (ebm-pabst, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 35 at p. 41) DOE notes that AEDM information provided to DOE is not 
publicly available.
    In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI and Grundfos supported the 
use of AEDMs. (HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) However, 
HI and Grundfos encouraged DOE to maintain the current calculation 
option since they believe it is less burdensome than an AEDM. Id. HI 
and Grundfos further stated that DOE should consider removing the 
calculation methods only when AEDMs are being used by all manufacturers 
for all reporting. Id. Additionally, HI and Grundfos expressed general 
agreement with the proposed validation classes. Id.
    The Efficiency Advocates commented that the calculation-based 
approach in the DOE test method and AEDMs proposed by DOE can be used 
in lieu of physical testing to help mitigate the

[[Page 17964]]

burden of testing the larger pumps. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 
3)
    In this final rule, DOE is adopting provisions in 10 CFR 429.59(i) 
that allow the use of AEDMs for pumps as proposed in the April 2022 
NOPR. Additionally, DOE is maintaining the calculation methods in the 
test procedure.
3. Enforcement Provisions
    Enforcement provisions govern the process DOE would follow when 
performing an assessment of basic model compliance with standards, as 
described under subpart C of part 429. Specifically, subpart C of part 
429 describes the notification requirements, legal processes, 
penalties, specific prohibited acts, and testing protocols related to 
testing covered equipment to determine or verify compliance with 
standards.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to apply the same general 
enforcement provisions contained in subpart C of part 429 to the 
proposed expanded scope of pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21305. Additionally, DOE 
proposed in the product-specific enforcement provisions in 10 CFR 
429.134(i) that DOE will test each pump unit according to the test 
method specified by the manufacturer, and if the model of pump unit was 
rated using an AEDM, DOE may conduct enforcement testing using either a 
testing approach or calculation approach. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its enforcement 
provision proposals. 87 FR 21268, 21305. In response, Grundfos agreed 
with the proposal but stated that DOE needs to clearly state that 
enforcement for AEDM reported products will apply the AEDM tolerances. 
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) Similarly, HI agreed with the standard 
enforcement requirements in 10 CFR 429, subpart C for expanded scope 
pumps but suggested the following modification to clause ii: DOE will 
test each pump unit according to the test method specified by the 
manufacturer in the certification report submitted pursuant to Sec.  
429.59(b); if the model or pump unit was rated using an AEDM, DOE may 
use either a testing approach or calculation approach using the basic 
model tolerances found at 429.70(i)(2)(ii). (HI, No. 33 at p. 9)
    In response to the comments from HI and Grundfos, DOE notes that an 
AEDM is a mathematical model that a manufacturer develops to accurately 
represent the tested performance of a specific pump validation class. 
To validate an AEDM, the manufacturer must test at least two basic 
models within a given validation class (see 10 CFR 429.70(j)(2)(i)). If 
the PEI calculated by the AEDM is no more than five percent less than 
the tested PEI, the AEDM has been validated (see 10 CFR 
429.70(j)(2)((ii)). If the PEI calculated by the AEDM is more than five 
percent less than the tested PEI, the AEDM is not validated and will 
need to be revised and compared to tested results until it is not more 
than five percent less than the tested PEI. For example, if tested PEI 
is equal to 1.0 and AEDM results are 0.97, the AEDM would be considered 
valid; however, if tested PEI is equal to 1.0 and AEDM results are 
0.94, the AEDM is not valid. When certifying basic models through 
testing, DOE specifies the determination of represented value in 10 CFR 
429.59(a). When determining representations for basic models using an 
AEDM, it is the manufacturer's responsibility to ensure that the 
represented value is consistent with the requirements in 10 CFR 
429.59(a).
    The previous paragraph addresses manufacturer responsibilities, 
specifically validation of an AEDM and represented values. DOE is also 
adopting provisions at 10 CFR 429.70(j)(5) to describe how DOE may 
conduct testing on individual pump models to verify basic model 
compliance with an energy consumption standard. DOE emphasizes that 
this compliance enforcement is separate and distinct from manufacturer 
certification requirements. 10 CFR 429.7(j)(5)(v) specifies that the 
result of a DOE verification test must be less than or equal to the 
certified rating multiplied by (1 + the applicable tolerance), where 
the applicable tolerance is 5 percent (see Table 4 to paragraph 
(j)(5)(vi)). Therefore, if results of an individual model tested by DOE 
are greater than 1.05 percent of a manufacturer's certified rating 
(i.e., the value the manufacturer certifies to DOE), this model's 
certified rating would be invalid, and DOE would pursue the actions 
listed in 10 CR 429.70(j)(v). For example, if a manufacturer were to 
certify a pump basic model with a PEI equal to 0.94 and DOE testing 
yields a PEI of 0.97, DOE would consider the model to meet its 
certified rating, since 0.97 is less than 1.05 percent of the certified 
PEI value of 0.94 (1.05 multiplied by 0.94 is 0.987). However, if DOE 
testing were to yield a PEI of 0.99, DOE would consider the model's 
certified rating to be invalid.
    In sum, DOE is adopting the five percent tolerance for both AEDM 
validation and AEDM verification testing. DOE is also adopting product-
specific enforcement provisions at 10 CFR 429.134 to specify that DOE 
will test each pump unit according to the test method specified by the 
manufacturer, and for pumps rated using an AEDM, DOE may conduct 
enforcement testing using either a testing approach or calculation 
approach.
4. Basic Model Definition
    As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, pump manufacturers may elect 
to group similar individual pump models within the same equipment class 
into the same basic model to reduce testing burden, provided all 
representations regarding the energy use of pumps within that basic 
model are identical and based on the most consumptive unit. 87 FR 
21268, 21305. Accordingly, manufacturers may pair a given bare pump 
with several different motors (or motor and controls) and can include 
all combinations under the same basic model if the certification of 
energy use and all representations made by the manufacturer are based 
on the most consumptive bare pump/motor (or motor and controls) 
combination for each basic model and all individual models are in the 
same equipment class. 86 FR 20075, 20083-20084.
    In the case of pumps, ``basic model'' means all units of a given 
class of pump manufactured by one manufacturer, having the same primary 
energy source, and having essentially identical electrical, physical, 
and functional (or hydraulic) characteristics that affect energy 
consumption, energy efficiency, water consumption, or water efficiency; 
and, in addition, for pumps that are subject to the standards specified 
in Sec.  431.465(b), the following provisions in Sec.  431.462 apply:

    (1) All variations in numbers of stages of bare RSV and ST pumps 
must be considered a single basic model;
    (2) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in impeller 
diameter, or impeller trim, may be considered a single basic model; 
and
    (3) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in number of 
stages or impeller diameter, and which are sold with motors (or 
motors and controls) of varying horsepower may only be considered a 
single basic model if:
    (i) For ESCC, ESFM, IL, and RSV pumps, each motor offered in the 
basic model has a nominal full load motor efficiency rated at the 
Federal minimum (see the current table for NEMA Design B motors at 
Sec.  431.25) or the same number of bands above the Federal minimum 
for each respective motor horsepower (see Table 3 of appendix A); or
    (ii) For ST pumps, each motor offered in the basic model has a 
full load motor efficiency at the default nominal full load 
submersible motor efficiency shown in Table 2 of appendix A to or 
the same number of bands above the default nominal full load 
submersible motor efficiency for each

[[Page 17965]]

respective motor horsepower (see Table 3 of appendix A).
    10 CFR 431.462.

    Clauses (1) and (2) of the basic model definition, which are 
applicable to pumps that are subject to the standards specified in 10 
CFR 431.465(b), align the scope of the ``basic model'' definition for 
pumps with the requirements that testing be conducted at a certain 
number of stages for RSV and ST pumps and at full impeller diameter. 10 
CFR 431.462. Clause (3) of the definition, applicable to pumps that are 
subject to the standards specified in 10 CFR 431.465(b), addresses 
basic models inclusive of pump models for which the bare pump differs 
in number of stages or impeller diameter. Id. Specifically, variation 
in motor sizing (i.e., variation in the horsepower rating of the paired 
motor as a result of different impeller trims or stages within a basic 
model) is not a basis for requiring units to be rated as unique basic 
models. However, variation in motor sizing may also be associated with 
variation in motor efficiency, which is a performance characteristic; 
typically, larger motors are more efficient than smaller motors. 86 FR 
20075, 20084.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that for motors not currently 
subject to the DOE test procedure for electric motors, it is not clear 
how manufacturers would determine the full-load efficiency of a given 
motor, or specifically, determine the number of bands above the Federal 
minimum or, for submersible pumps, above the default efficiency. 87 FR 
21268, 21306-21307. For inverter-only motors, DOE noted that the IEC 
recently published an industry test procedure that provides test 
methods for measuring the efficiency of these motors: IEC 60034-2-
3:2020, ``Rotating electrical machines--Part 2-3: Specific test methods 
for determining losses and efficiency of converter-fed AC motors'' 
(``IEC 60034'') and IEC 61800-9-2:2017. Id.
    DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that PERSTD for 
inverter-only motors would still be based on DOE's standards for NEMA 
Design B motors. 87 FR 21268, 21307. Additionally, DOE proposed to 
amend clause (3) for inverter-only motors so that the current band rule 
does not apply, and instead the grouping can be based on anything above 
the Federal minimum for NEMA Design B motors as long as the rating is 
based on the lowest number of bands above the minimum. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, following consideration of stakeholder's 
comments, DOE did not propose to allow the grouping of single-phase and 
polyphase products into a single basic model. 87 FR 21268, 21307. 
Instead, DOE proposed to require that pumps sold with single-phase 
motors can continue to be rated as bare pumps (with the exception of 
SVIL as discussed in section III.G). Id.
    DOE requested comment on its proposed amendments to the definition 
of the basic model in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21307. In 
response, HI and Grundfos stated that they agreed with the proposed 
amendments to the basic model but recommended adding the models in the 
proposed scope expansion to the basic model definition if/when the 
expanded scope pumps are added. (HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31 
at p. 9)
    Grundfos disagreed with DOE's interpretation of how horsepower 
affects multi-stage pump basic models. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 11) This 
comment is discussed in detail in section III.A.4.d as it pertains to 
the scope of this test procedure.
    Additionally, Grundfos recommended DOE change clause (3) of the 
basic model definition. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) Grundfos commented 
that it finds certain applications of bowl assemblies could lead to a 
product where both impeller trim and motor size vary. Id. Grundfos 
recommended that DOE change clause (3) to read: ``Pump models for which 
the bare pump differs in number of stages and/or impeller diameter . . 
.'' Id. The current clause only includes ``or,'' which would imply the 
only allowance is either in the number of stages or impeller trim when 
it could be both. Id. DOE agrees with the clarification Grundfos offers 
and is revising the definition for basic model as Grundfos recommends.
    DOE will address expanded scope pumps in the basic model definition 
in any future rulemaking related to the certification of these pumps.

J. Representations of Energy Use and Energy Efficiency

    DOE understands manufacturers often make representations 
(graphically or in numerical form) of energy use metrics, including 
pump efficiency, overall (wire-to-water) efficiency, bowl efficiency, 
driver power input, pump power input (brake or shaft horsepower), and/
or pump power output (hydraulic horsepower). Manufacturers often make 
these representations at multiple impeller trims, operating speeds, and 
number of stages for a given pump. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed 
to allow manufacturers to continue making these representations to 
ensure consistent and standardized representations across the pump 
industry. 87 FR 21268, 21308. To ensure such representations are not in 
conflict with the reported PEI for any given pump model, DOE proposed 
to establish optional testing procedures for these parameters that are 
part of the DOE test procedure. Id. DOE also proposed that, to the 
extent manufacturers wish to make representations regarding the 
performance of pumps using these additional metrics, they would be 
required to do so based on testing in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
adopt optional test provisions for the measurement of overall (wire-to-
water) efficiency, driver power input, and/or pump power output 
(hydraulic horsepower). 87 FR 21268, 21308. Grundfos commented that it 
has concerns with these proposed revisions since the testing is 
conducted only against a basic model and does not cover the full 
performance range for all possible individual models that a basic model 
represents. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) HI agreed that representations 
should be consistent, but also suggested that DOE allow pump 
manufacturers to represent data over the full performance range, 
including trims of the impeller and cases where the maximum or minimum 
speed range is outside the rated nominal speed range (i.e., a pump 
within scope but with an operating speed range that goes above 4,320 
rpm). (HI, No. 33 at p. 9)
    DOE also requested comment on its understanding that HI 40.6-2021 
contains all the necessary methods to determine overall (wire-to-water) 
efficiency, driver power input, and/or pump power output (hydraulic 
horsepower) and that further specification is not necessary. HI and 
Grundfos agreed that HI 40.6-2021 provides all the necessary methods. 
(HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9)
    After further review and consideration of stakeholder comments, DOE 
has determined that any requirements for additional representations of 
pump energy use and energy efficiency will not be addressed in the 
current rulemaking. Specifically, in order to meet its stated goal of 
ensuring representations of metrics other than PEI are not in conflict 
with the reported PEI for any given pump model, it would only be 
necessary to finalize provision related to metrics used in the 
determination of PEI, which would include driver input power at load 
points used in the determination of PEI. However, given that these 
metrics are a component of PEI, they must

[[Page 17966]]

already be determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure 
including relevant provisions of HI 40.6-2021. For these reasons, DOE 
is not finalizing its proposal with respect to optional 
representations.

K. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization

    EPCA requires that test procedures proposed by DOE not be unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) The following sections 
discuss DOE's evaluation of estimated costs and savings associated with 
the final amendments.
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the existing test 
procedure at appendix A for pumps by: (1) expanding the scope to 
include SVIL pumps; (2) expanding the scope to include other specified 
clean water pumps; (3) reducing the pump bowl diameter restriction to 
include more ST pumps; (4) changing the definitions of ESFM and ESCC 
pumps to cover all end-suction pumps; (5) incorporating a nominal speed 
of 1,200 rpm, in addition to 1,800 rpm and 3,600 rpm; (6) providing a 
calculation method for pumps sold with inverter-only motors; and (7) 
updating the part-load loss coefficients for pumps sold with induction 
motors. 87 FR 21268, 21309. DOE has determined that the test procedure 
finalized in this notice will not be unduly burdensome for 
manufacturers to conduct. Further discussion of the cost impacts of the 
test procedure amendments are presented in the following paragraphs.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether pump 
manufacturers had to limit any pump features due to the time and cost 
of evaluating pumps performance according to DOE's current test 
procedure, including, but not limited to, the nature of the features 
that manufacturers have had to forego providing, the extent of the 
limits that manufacturers have had to place, and the manner in which 
manufacturers have had to apply these limits--such as on the basis of 
intended markets (e.g., higher-end vs. budget-end). 87 FR 21268, 21309. 
DOE also requested information regarding how these burdens may be 
mitigated to reduce the likelihood of manufacturers having to limit the 
inclusion of features with their pumps. Id.
    In response, Grundfos stated it has limited modifications to and 
restricted sales of certain equipment because of the testing burden 
created by DOE's regulations. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) HI commented 
that manufacturers have chosen to limit modifications to equipment 
(i.e., new casting forms, engineered-to-order product, alternative/new 
VFD or motor technology) because it poses a substantial testing burden. 
(HI, No. 33 at p. 9) HI asserted that these limitations impact end 
users because they result in pump manufacturers providing fewer product 
offerings, and because testing results in excessive lead times. Id.
    DOE notes that pump manufacturers must comply with the energy 
conservation standards that were established in 2016 and required 
compliance beginning on January 27, 2020. 81 FR 4368 (January 26, 2016) 
(``January 2016 ECS Final Rule''). First-time compliance costs 
associated with meeting those energy conservation standards included 
testing costs, potential capital costs, and other one-time manufacturer 
costs associated with developing a testing and certification protocol. 
DOE also recognizes that the current test procedure does not provide a 
calculation method for pumps sold with motors that do not have a DOE 
energy efficiency standard; therefore, for pumps that rely on such 
motors, wire-to-water testing is required for each basic model. 
Finally, DOE notes that for all pumps currently subject to the energy 
conservation standards, the applicable energy efficiency values must be 
determined for all basic models according to the DOE test procedure, 
which includes the calculation method for certain pumps.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE estimated a per unit test cost of 
$1,600, and estimated that 59 percent of the models certified in DOE's 
Compliance Certification Database (``CCD'') were certified using the 
calculation-based approach. 87 FR 21268, 21309. DOE estimated that it 
would take a mechanical engineer two hours to calculate and determine a 
rating for each basic model. Id. Assuming a fully burdened engineering 
hourly wage of $66.16,\36\ DOE estimates the labor cost of performing 
the pump calculation method to be $132.31 per basic model. These cost 
estimates apply to the discussion in the following sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ DOE used the mean hourly wage of $46.64, taken from BLS's 
``Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2021'' using the Occupation 
Profile of ``Mechanical Engineers'' (17-2141). See: www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes172141.htm. Last accessed on October 11, 2022.
    Additionally, DOE used data from the ``Employer Costs for 
Employee Compensation--June 2022'' to estimate that a Private 
Industry Worker's wages and salary are 70.5% of an employee's total 
compensation. See: www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf. Last 
accessed on October 11, 2022.
    Therefore, total employer hourly cost is $66.16 = $46.64 / 
0.705.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has determined that the test procedure amendments in this final 
rule will impact testing costs as discussed in the following sections.
a. Scope Expansion
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to expand the scope of this 
test procedure to include SVIL pumps, other specified clean water 
pumps, ST pumps with bowl diameters greater than 6 inches, currently 
uncovered end-suction pumps, and pumps designed to operate with a 6-
pole induction motor or with a non-induction motor with an operating 
range that includes speeds of rotation between 960 and 1,440 rpm. 87 FR 
21268, 21273-21281. DOE also assumed a sampling plan consistent with 
that for pumps currently subject to the test procedure, which requires 
a sample size of at least two units per pump basic model be tested when 
determining representative values of PEI, as well as other pump 
performance metrics. 87 FR 21268, 21303. Additionally, DOE assumed that 
manufacturers would test pumps in-house. 87 FR 21268, 21310. To test a 
pump in-house, each manufacturer might have to undertake the 
construction and maintenance of a test facility that is capable of 
testing pumps in compliance with the test procedure, including 
acquisition and calibration of any necessary measurement equipment. Id. 
DOE also assumed that manufacturers have a pump test facility available 
but may not have the equipment required to conduct the DOE test 
procedure and that the cost of purchasing such equipment is 
approximately $4,000 based on a review of available testing equipment 
on the market. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE assumed that pump manufacturers who are 
member companies of HI or who conduct testing in accordance with the 
January 2016 Final Rule for other product offerings already conduct 
testing in accordance with HI 40.6-2014, and would not incur any 
additional capital expenditures to be able to conduct the proposed DOE 
pump test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21310. Pump manufacturers who are not 
members of HI may need to purchase electrical measurement equipment 
with plus or minus 2 percent accuracy to conduct the pump test 
procedure. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE estimated that calibrating the 
flowmeter, torque sensor, power quality meter, pressure transducer, and 
laser tachometer, together, will cost a manufacturer about $1,250 per 
year. Id.

[[Page 17967]]

    DOE requested comment on its assumptions and understanding of the 
anticipated impact and potential costs to pump manufacturers if DOE 
expands the scope of the pumps test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21310. 
Additionally, DOE requested comment on any potential cost manufacturers 
may incur, if any, from this NOPR's proposed scope expansion. Id.
    In response, HI and Grundfos stated that adding additional pump 
categories to the test procedure scope will increase burden on 
manufactures due to annual recertification, surveillance, testing, 
reporting, and documentation burden. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos, 
No. 31 at p. 10) HI also commented that larger pumps with higher flow 
rates within the proposed scope expansion may require different testing 
infrastructure and instrumentation with substantial capital investment 
required. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10) Specifically, HI stated that BB1 pumps 
are considerably larger, and the cost and burden associated with 
testing BB pumps will be significantly higher. (HI, No. 33 at p. 2) 
Grundfos stated adding 6[hyphen]pole product requires upgrades to 
testing facilities and infrastructure that will increase costs. 
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10)
    DOE acknowledges that larger pumps may require additional 
investments in testing facilities. However, since no test cost data was 
provided by manufacturers, DOE was unable to adjust the test cost 
estimates for this final rule. DOE notes that it is not adopting the 
proposal to include ST and VT pumps with bowl diameters larger than 6 
inches or BB pumps in the scope of this test procedure. Therefore, the 
burden associated with test facility modifications is reduced compared 
to the burden associated with the proposals in the April 2022 NOPR.
b. Calculation Method for Testing Pumps With Inverter-Only Motors
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed a calculation method for 
testing pumps with inverter-only motors. 87 FR 21268, 21310. The 
current test procedure does not include a calculation method for motors 
that do not have a DOE efficiency standard; therefore, manufacturers 
are required to conduct wire-to-water testing for pumps sold with these 
(i.e., inverter) motors. Aside from the proposed calculation approach, 
the test procedure, metrics, and sampling plan for pumps remain 
consistent with the requirements established in the January 2016 Final 
Rule and, among other things, require a sample size of at least two 
units per pump basic model be tested when determining representative 
values of PEI, as well as other pump performance metrics.
    For pumps already certified, DOE would not expect any additional 
costs to manufacturers. DOE has determined that the calculation method 
for inverter-only motors proposed in the April 2022 NOPR would provide 
results that are conservative when compared to results from wire-to-
water testing, which is still an option in the test procedure. 
Consequently, DOE does not expect manufacturers will need to rerate 
their basic models. For new basic models where the bare pump is already 
certified (i.e., the only change is in the inverter-only motor sold 
with the pump), DOE expects manufacturer cost to be the labor required 
to run the calculations (i.e., $132.32 per basic model), providing an 
estimated savings of $3,070 per basic model (i.e., test cost 
savings).\37\ DOE expects that there would be no change in test cost 
for new bare pump basic models paired with an inverter-only motor, 
since the bare pump would still need to be tested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ As previously stated, DOE estimated that the per unit test 
cost is $1,600 and at least two units need to be tested. Therefore, 
the calculation method is estimated to save approximately $3,070 = 
($1,600 x 2)-$132.32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its assumptions 
and understanding of the anticipated impact and potential cost savings 
to manufacturers of pumps sold with inverter-only motors if DOE were to 
adopt the proposed calculation method. 87 FR 21268, 21310. 
Additionally, DOE requested comment on any potential costs or savings 
that manufacturers may incur, if any, from this proposal. Id.
    In response, Grundfos and HI agreed that there will be reduced 
testing burden and cost savings. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31 
at p. 10) HI additionally estimated that the reduction of testing 
burden associated with consolidation can range from 2 to 8 basic 
models. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10) HI also recommended that DOE consider 
other actions to reduce test cost such as sample pumps, management of 
basic models, other indirect labor, etc. Id.
    DOE has concluded that the adopted calculation method for inverter-
only motors will significantly reduce test burden. DOE may consider the 
additional actions to reduce test cost recommended by HI in a future 
test procedure rulemaking.
c. Updated Calculation Method for Testing Pumps With Induction Motors
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed an updated calculation method 
for testing pumps with induction motors. 87 FR 21268, 21310. The 
updated calculation method provides less conservative part-load loss 
coefficients than those provided in the current test procedure; 
however, DOE tentatively determined that the coefficients would still 
be conservative relative to wire-to-water testing. Id. Aside from the 
updated part-load motor coefficients, the test procedure, metrics, and 
sampling plan for pumps remains consistent with the requirements 
established in the January 2016 Final Rule and, among other things, 
requires that a sample size of at least two units per pump basic model 
be tested when determining representative values of PEI, as well as 
other pump performance metrics. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also explained that, for pumps already 
certified, DOE does not expect any additional costs to manufacturers 
since the current calculation method provides the most conservative 
results. 87 FR 21268, 21310. DOE expects that there will be no change 
in test cost for new bare pump basic models paired with an induction 
motor, since the bare pump will need to be tested. Id.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its assumptions 
and understanding that there will be no cost impact to manufacturers if 
DOE adopts the proposed updated coefficients for part-load motor 
losses. 87 FR 21268, 21310. Additionally, DOE requested comment on any 
potential costs or savings that manufacturers may incur, if any, from 
this proposal. Id.
    HI and Grundfos responded that there would be some cost to update 
procedures and calculators to reflect the revised method. (HI, No. 33 
at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) Specifically, Grundfos expected no 
manufacturer cost savings associated with this change. (Grundfos, No. 
31 at p. 10) HI said that because the revised method can provide a 
better PEI, manufacturers who want to improve their PEI representation 
will have costs associated with updating representations in marketing, 
nameplates, and certification of data. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10)
    DOE notes that it is primarily concerned with increased test costs 
associated with a test procedure revision that would require 
manufacturers to retest and recertify their basic models. In this case, 
DOE understands that manufacturers would be voluntarily recertifying 
certain basic models for marketing purposes only.
d. Additional Amendments
    DOE does not anticipate that the remaining amendments, proposed in 
the April 2022 NOPR and as follows, would impact test costs.

[[Page 17968]]

    (1) Incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 into 10 CFR 431.463;
    (2) Remove the incorporations by reference of ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 
and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014;
    In the April 2022 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that 
manufacturers would be able to rely on data generated under the current 
test procedure and would not have to retest for reporting, 
certification or labeling purposes. 87 FR 21268, 21310. DOE maintains 
that determination in this final rule.
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
    DOE's established practice is to adopt relevant industry standards 
as DOE test procedures unless such methodology would be unduly 
burdensome to conduct or would not produce test results that reflect 
the energy efficiency, energy use, water use (as specified in EPCA) or 
estimated operating costs of that product during a representative 
average use cycle or period of use. See 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 
appendix A, section 8(c). In cases where the industry standard does not 
meet EPCA's statutory criteria for test procedures, DOE will make 
modifications through the rulemaking process to these testing standards 
as needed to adopt the procedure as the DOE test procedure.
    The current test procedure for pumps at subpart Y to part 431 
incorporates by reference ANSI/HI 40.6-2014 for rotodynamic pump 
efficiency testing and ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 
that includes pumps nomenclature and definitions. As discussed, the 
amendments finalized in this rule update the DOE test procedure to 
reference the most recent version of HI 40.6-2021. DOE is removing its 
reference ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 since these 
industry standards have been replaced by ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, which 
is in turn referenced by HI 40.6-2021. The industry standards that DOE 
is incorporating by reference in this document are summarized in 
section IV.N of this document.
    In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the benefits and 
burdens of the proposed updates and additions to industry standards 
referenced in the test procedure for pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21311. While 
DOE received no specific comments on the burdens associated with its 
proposal, both HI and Grundfos recommended that DOE incorporate ANSI/HI 
14.1-14.2 instead of recreating definitions for regulatory clarity. 
(HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) Grundfos also 
recommended that DOE create its own terms when deviating from industry 
terms. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10)
    As discussed in section III.B.2, DOE notes that its definitional 
language must be clear and consistent on its own without references to 
industry standards. Therefore, DOE is not referencing ANSI/HI 14.1-
14.2-2019 in its definitions.

L. Compliance Date

    The effective date for the adopted test procedure amendment will be 
30 days after publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. 
EPCA prescribes that all representations of energy efficiency and 
energy use, including those made on marketing materials and product 
labels, must be made in accordance with an amended test procedure, 
beginning 180 days after publication of the final rule in the Federal 
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) EPCA provides an allowance for 
individual manufacturers to petition DOE for an extension of the 180-
day period if the manufacturer may experience undue hardship in meeting 
the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2) To receive such an extension, 
petitions must be filed with DOE no later than 60 days before the end 
of the 180-day period and must detail how the manufacturer will 
experience undue hardship. Id.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive 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 techniques 
may include identifying changing future compliance costs that might 
result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes. 
For the reasons stated in this 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. DOE has concluded that this 
rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. The factual basis for this certification is set forth 
below.
    DOE has recently conducted a focused inquiry into small business 
manufacturers of the equipment covered by this rulemaking. DOE used the 
Small

[[Page 17969]]

Business Administration's (``SBA'') 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 commercial and industrial pumps is 
classified under NAICS 333914, ``measuring, dispensing, and other 
pumping equipment manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 750 
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 Compliance 
Certification Database \38\ to create a list of companies that import 
or otherwise manufacture the equipment covered by this rulemaking . 
Once DOE created a list of potential manufacturers, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification 
Database, available at: www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on DOE's analysis, 46 companies potentially selling 
commercial and industrial pumps covered by this test procedure were 
identified. 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 46 companies, 21 
were therefore further identified as a small business. Based on a 
review of publicly available model databases, DOE estimated the number 
of models currently covered by the test procedure for each small 
business, excluding four small businesses not reflected in the model 
databases. DOE attributes a total of 779 unique basic models of covered 
pumps to small businesses, ranging from one model to 503 models for an 
average of approximately 46 models per small business. DOE was able to 
find revenue estimates for all 21 small businesses.
    DOE estimates that this test procedure would not require any 
manufacturer to incur any additional testing burden associated with the 
test procedure. If finalized, DOE recognizes that commercial and 
industrial pump energy conservation standards may be proposed or 
promulgated in the future and pump manufacturers would then be required 
to test all covered pumps in accordance with the test procedures. (See 
Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013). Therefore, although such testing is 
not yet required, DOE is presenting the costs associated with testing 
equipment and procedure consistent with the requirements of the test 
procedure, as would be required to comply with any future energy 
conservation standards for pumps. Additionally, since the list of small 
businesses was drawn from manufacturers with products covered by the 
previous test procedure, DOE assumes that each noted small business 
already possesses the necessary equipment for testing under the test 
procedure. Impacts for each test procedure amendment are reviewed 
below:
SVIL Product Class Scope Expansion
    DOE examined the websites and, when available, product catalogs of 
all previously identified 20 potential small businesses for listings of 
SVIL pumps. DOE identified two small businesses manufacturing SVIL 
pumps--producing an estimated total of 65 basic models, with one small 
business producing nine basic models and another producing as many as 
56 basic models. DOE estimated that it would cost approximately $1,600 
per unit tested--a sample of two units being required per basic model. 
Accordingly, all small businesses combined would incur costs of 
approximately $208,000--with the first small business incurring a cost 
of $28,800 and the second incurring a cost of $179,200. However, such 
testing would only be required upon the compliance date of any future 
energy conservation standard for SVIL pumps.
    DOE was able to find revenue estimates for both small businesses. 
Testing costs for newly covered SVIL pumps represent significantly less 
than one percent of estimated annual revenue for one of the small 
businesses and would constitute as much as ten percent of estimated 
annual revenue for the small business producing 56 models.
Other Clean Water Pump Scope Expansion
    DOE examined the websites and, when available, the product catalogs 
of all previously identified 21 potential small businesses for listings 
of any of the clean water pumps that are newly covered under this test 
procedure. DOE identified four small businesses manufacturing clean 
water pumps covered by this rulemaking that are not covered by the 
current test procedure. One of these manufacturers also produce SVIL 
pumps. Although a newly covered model count estimate was not possible 
for two small businesses, the remaining two small businesses produce an 
estimated total of 37 newly covered basic models, the first producing 
15 basic models and the second producing 22 newly covered basic models. 
The first small business produces approximately 15 models that would 
fall under the 1,200 rpm scope expansion. With the second small 
business, approximately one-third of newly covered unique basic models 
are submersible pumps and two-thirds are vertical turbine pumps, 
several of which also fall under the 1,200 rpm scope expansion. DOE 
estimated that it would cost approximately $1,600 per unit tested--a 
sample of two being required per unique basic model. Accordingly, the 
small businesses combined would incur costs of approximately $118,400--
with the first incurring a cost of $48,000and the second incurring a 
cost of $70,400. The first small business produces both SVIL pumps and 
newly covered clean water pumps and would incur an approximate total 
testing cost of $76,800.
    DOE was able to find revenue estimates for both small businesses. 
Testing costs for newly covered clean water pumps represent 
significantly less than one percent of estimated annual revenue for 
both small businesses. However, such testing would only be required 
upon the compliance date of any future energy conservation standard for 
SVIL pumps.
Calculation Method Changes
    Relative to the current test procedure calculation methodology, the 
calculation changes are conservative; therefore, manufacturers would 
not have to recalculate or re-rate existing models. Accordingly, DOE 
does not anticipate that updating the part-load loss coefficients for 
pumps sold with induction motors or providing a calculation method for 
pumps sold with inverter-only motors would impose any costs on small 
businesses when the test procedure is in force. Likewise, permitting 
the use of AEDMs in lieu of the calculation-based test is not expected 
to result in additional costs for affected small businesses, as they 
will continue to be able to employ the calculation-based test.
Conclusion
    DOE identified a total of five small business OEMs affected by this 
final rule. The affected small businesses represent approximately 25 
percent of all identified small business OEMs producing pumps covered 
under this rulemaking. DOE believes this to be a substantial number of 
affected small

[[Page 17970]]

entities in the context of the pumps industry. However, as noted 
previously, the presented costs would not be incurred as a result of 
this test procedure taking effect and are, with one exception, 
estimated to constitute less than one percent of the affected small 
businesses' revenue if DOE establishes energy conservation standards 
for pumps not currently subject to DOE's energy conservation standards.
    Based on 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 determined 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 pumps must certify to DOE that their products 
comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. To certify 
compliance, manufacturers must first obtain test data for their 
products according to the DOE test procedures, including any amendments 
adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for 
the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered 
consumer products and commercial equipment, including pumps. (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.
    DOE is not amending the certification or reporting requirements for 
pumps in this final rule. Instead, DOE may consider proposals to amend 
the certification requirements and reporting for pumps 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 test procedure amendments that 
it expects will be used to develop and implement future energy 
conservation standards for pumps. DOE has determined that this rule 
falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from 
review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. 
Specifically, DOE has determined that adopting test procedures for 
measuring energy efficiency of consumer products and industrial 
equipment is consistent with activities identified in 10 CFR part 1021, 
appendix A to subpart D, A5 and A6. Accordingly, neither an 
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is 
required.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 
1999), imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and 
implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that 
have federalism implications. The Executive order requires agencies to 
examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any 
action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and 
to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The Executive order 
also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure 
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. 
On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the 
intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the 
development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE examined this final 
rule and determined that it will not have a substantial direct effect 
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and 
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal 
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the 
products that are the subject of this final rule. States can petition 
DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on 
criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is 
required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation 
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal 
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) 
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to 
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected 
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification 
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 
specifically requires that executive agencies make every reasonable 
effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the 
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing 
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction; 
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines 
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity 
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney 
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive 
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in 
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is 
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the 
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, 
this final rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``UMRA'') 
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal 
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the 
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). 
For a regulatory action resulting in a rule that may cause the 
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year 
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a 
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the 
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. 
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan

[[Page 17971]]

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 which 
are available at www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has 
reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has 
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those 
guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB, 
a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy action. A 
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency 
that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final 
rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under Executive 
Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a 
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of 
energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a 
significant energy action. For any significant energy action, the 
agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy 
supply, distribution, or use if the regulation is implemented, and of 
reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on 
energy supply, distribution, and use.
    This regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has 
it been designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator 
of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and, 
accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 
1974

    Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act 
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the 
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal 
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; 
``FEAA'') Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where 
a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the 
notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and 
background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE 
to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal 
Trade Commission (``FTC'') concerning the impact of the commercial or 
industry standards on competition.
    The modifications to the test procedure for pumps adopted in this 
final rule incorporates testing methods contained in certain sections 
of the following commercial standards: HI 40.6-2021, HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 
9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data 
Book, ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME 
MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME MFC-22-2007, AWWA E103-2015, CSA 
C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, 
ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 
5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017. 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

    In this final rule, DOE incorporates by reference the following 
standards:

(1) HI 40.6-2021. This standard establishes testing protocols for 
testing of rotodynamic pumps for determination of pump efficiency in 
a uniform manner.
(2) ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017. This standard, referenced in HI 40.6-2021, 
applies to rotodynamic pumps and defines calculation of net positive 
suction head (``NPSH'') margin and recommends NPSH margin for these 
pumps based on specific application considerations, pump design, and 
the flow relative to the BEP.
(3) ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and details pump piping requirements for rotodynamic pumps and 
effects of inlet/outlet piping on pump performance.
(4) ANSI/HI 9.8-2018. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and discusses appropriate design for various pump intakes.
(5) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-
2021 and covers types, nomenclature, and definitions for commercial 
and industrial pump types.
(6) HI Engineering Data Book--Second Edition. This document is 
referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and covers fluid

[[Page 17972]]

characteristics, fluid flow, and characteristics of piping 
materials.

    Copies of HI 40.6-2021, ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017, ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016, 
ANSI/HI 9.8-2018, ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, and the HI Engineering Data 
Book--Second Edition can be obtained from the Hydraulics Institute, 300 
Interpace Parkway, Bldg. a 3rd floor, Parsippany, NJ 07054, (973) 267-
9700, or online at: pumps.org.

(7) ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-
2021 and provides information on ultrasonic flowmeters that operate 
on the measurement of acoustic signal transit times.
(8) ASME MFC-3M-2004. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and specifies the geometry and method of use for pressure 
differential devices (i.e., orifice, nozzle, and venturi meters) for 
measuring full-pipe liquid flow in a closed conduit.
(9) ASME MFC-8M-2001. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and describes a method for connecting pressure signal transmissions 
between primary and secondary devices.
(10) ASME MFC-12M-2006. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and provides information on the use of multiport averaging Pitot 
head-type devices used to measure liquids and gases.
(11) ASME MFC-16-2014. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and provides information on industrial electromagnetic flowmeters 
and their application in the measurement of liquid flow.
(12) ASME MFC-22-2007. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and describes the criteria for application of turbine flowmeters 
with rotating blades for measuring full-pipe liquid flow through 
closed conduit.

    Copies of ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, and ASME MFC-8M-
2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, and ASME MFC-22-2007, can be 
obtained from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Two Park 
Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, (800) 843-2763, or online at: 
asme.org.

(13) AWWA E103-2015. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
provides minimum requirements for horizontal centrifugal pumps and 
for vertical line-shaft pumps for installation in wells, water 
treatment plants, water transmission systems, and water distribution 
systems.

    Copies of AWWA E103-2015 can be obtained from the American Water 
Works Association, 6666 W Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (303) 794-
7711, or online at: awwa.org.

(14) CSA C390-10. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
establishes test methods, marking requirements, and energy 
efficiency levels for three-phase induction motors.

    Copies of CSA C390-10 can be obtained from the Canadian Standards 
Association, 178 Rexdale Blvd., Toronto, ON, Canada M9W 1R3, (800) 463-
6727, or online at csagroup.org.

(15) IEEE 112-2017. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
contains instructions for conducting and reporting the more 
generally applicable and acceptable tests of polyphase induction 
motors and generators.
(16) IEEE 114-2010. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
contains instructions to determine the performance characteristics 
of single-phase induction motors.

    Copies of IEEE 112-2017 and IEEE 114-2010 can be obtained from the 
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, 
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4141, (732) 981-0060, or online at 
standards.ieee.org.

(17) ISO 1438:2017. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
specifies methods for the measurement of water flow in open channels 
using rectangular and triangular-notch (V-notch) thin-plate weirs.
(18) ISO 2186:2007. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
specifies provisions for the design, lay-out and installation for 
transmitting pressure signals from a primary to a secondary device 
without signal distortion.
(19) ISO 2715:2017. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021, 
describes and discusses the characteristics of turbine flowmeters, 
and is applicable to metering any appropriate liquid.
(20) ISO 3354:2008. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
specifies a method for the determination of the volume flow rate in 
a closed conduit.
(21) ISO 3966:2020. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
specifies a method for determining volume flowrate in a closed 
conduit using propeller-type current-meters.
(22) ISO 5167-1:2003. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 
and establishes methods of measuring and calculating flowrate in a 
conduit using pressure differential devices (i.e., orifice plates, 
nozzles, and Venturi tubes).
(23) ISO 5198:1987. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and 
specifies precision class tests (i.e., high accuracy) for testing 
centrifugal, mixed flow, and axial pumps.
(24) ISO 6416:2017. HI 40.6-2021 references ISO/TR 12765 which is 
identical to this standard, which describes the establishment and 
operation of an ultrasonic gauging station for the continuous 
measurement of discharge in a river, an open channel or a closed 
conduit.
(25) ISO 20456:2017. HI 40.6-2021 references ISO 9104:1991 which has 
since been revised to ISO 20456:2017, which cancels and replaces ISO 
9104:1991. ISO 20456:2017 describes how industrial electromagnetic 
flowmeters are used for the measurement of flowrate of a conductive 
liquid in a closed conduit running full.

    Copies of ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017 can be obtained from the International 
Organization for Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 
Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, or online at: iso.org.
    The following standards are already approved for the sections where 
they appear: CSA C747-2009, FM Class Number 1319, HI 40.6-2014, HI 
41.5-2022, IEEE 113-1985, IEEE 114-2010, NFPA 20-2016, NSF/ANSI 50-
2015, UL 448, and UL 1081.

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 431

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

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February 
28, 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.


[[Page 17973]]


    Signed in Washington, DC, on March 15, 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.


0
2. Amend Sec.  429.59 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(2)(iv) through (vii) as paragraphs 
(a)(2)(v) through (viii); and
0
c. Adding new paragraph (a)(3).
    The revision and additions read as follows:


Sec.  429.59   Pumps.

* * * * *
    (a) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must 
determine the represented value, which includes the certified rating, 
for each basic model of general purpose pump either by testing (which 
includes the calculation-based methods in the test procedure), in 
conjunction with the following sampling provisions, or by application 
of an AEDM that meets the requirements of Sec.  429.70 and the 
provisions of this section. Manufacturers must determine the 
represented value, which includes the certified rating, for each basic 
model of dedicated-purpose pool pump by testing, in conjunction with 
the following sampling provisions. Manufacturers must update 
represented values to account for any change in the applicable motor 
standards in subpart B of part 431 of this chapter and certify amended 
values as of the next annual certification.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) General pumps. The representative values for pump total head 
in feet at BEP and nominal speed, volume per unit time in gallons per 
minute at BEP and nominal speed, and calculated driver power input at 
each load point must be the arithmetic mean of the value determined for 
each tested unit of general pump.
* * * * *
    (3) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of 
testing, a represented value of efficiency or consumption for a basic 
model of pump must be determined through the application of an AEDM 
pursuant to the requirements of Sec.  429.70 and the provisions of this 
section, where:
    (i) Any represented value of energy consumption or other measure of 
energy use of a basic model for which consumers would favor lower 
values shall be greater than or equal to the output of the AEDM and 
less than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model; and
    (ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of 
energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor 
higher values shall be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and 
greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  429.70 by adding paragraph (m) to read as follows:


Sec.  429.70  Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency and 
energy use.

* * * * *
    (m) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for general 
pumps--(1) Criteria an AEDM must satisfy. A manufacturer may not apply 
an AEDM to a basic model to determine its efficiency pursuant to this 
section, unless:
    (i) The AEDM is derived from a mathematical model that estimates 
the energy efficiency or energy consumption characteristics of the 
basic model as measured by the applicable DOE test procedure;
    (ii) The AEDM is based on engineering or statistical analysis, 
computer simulation or modeling, or other analytic evaluation of 
performance data; and
    (iii) The manufacturer has validated the AEDM, in accordance with 
paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
    (2) Validation of an AEDM. Before using an AEDM, the manufacturer 
must validate the AEDM's accuracy and reliability as follows:
    (i) AEDM overview. The manufacturer must select at least the 
minimum number of basic models for each validation class specified in 
paragraph (m)(2)(iv) of this section to which the particular AEDM 
applies. Using the AEDM, calculate the PEI for each of the selected 
basic models. Test each basic model and determine the represented 
value(s) in accordance with Sec.  429.63(a). Compare the results from 
the testing and the AEDM output according to paragraph (m)(2)(ii) of 
this section. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the accuracy 
and repeatability of the AEDM.
    (ii) AEDM basic model tolerances. (A) The predicted representative 
PEI for each basic model calculated by applying the AEDM may not be 
more than five percent less than the represented PEI determined from 
the corresponding test of the model.
    (B) The predicted constant or variable load pump energy index for 
each basic model calculated by applying the AEDM must meet or exceed 
the applicable federal energy conservation standard.
    (iii) Additional test unit requirements. (A) Each AEDM must be 
supported by test data obtained from physical tests of current models; 
and
    (B) Test results used to validate the AEDM must meet or exceed 
current, applicable Federal standards as specified in part 431 of this 
chapter; and
    (C) Each test must have been performed in accordance with the 
applicable DOE test procedure with which compliance is required at the 
time the basic models used for validation are distributed in commerce.
    (iv) Pump validation classes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Minimum number of distinct basic
           Validation class                models that must be tested
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Constant Load End-suction Closed-  2 Basic Models.
 Coupled Pumps and Constant Load End-
 suction Frame-Mounted Pumps.
(B) Variable Load End-suction Closed-  2 Basic Models.
 Coupled Pumps and Variable Load End-
 suction Frame-Mounted Pumps.
(C) Constant Load Inline Pumps and     2 Basic Models.
 Constant Load Small Vertical Inline
 Pumps.
(D) Variable Load Inline Pumps and     2 Basic Models.
 Variable Load Small Vertical Inline
 Pumps.
(E) Constant Load Radially-Split       2 Basic Models.
 Multi-Stage Vertical Pumps and
 Constant Load Radially-Split Multi-
 Stage Horizonal Pumps.
(F) Variable Load Radially-Split       2 Basic Models.
 Multi-Stage Vertical Pumps and
 Variable Load Radially-Split Multi-
 Stage Horizontal Pumps.

[[Page 17974]]

 
(G) Constant Load Submersible Turbine  2 Basic Models.
 Pumps and Constant Load Vertical
 Turbine Pumps.
(H) Variable Load Submersible Turbine  2 Basic Models.
 Pumps and Variable Load Vertical
 Turbine Pumps.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) AEDM records retention requirements. If a manufacturer has used 
an AEDM to determine representative values pursuant to this section, 
the manufacturer must have available upon request for inspection by the 
Department records showing:
    (i) The AEDM, including the mathematical model, the engineering or 
statistical analysis, and/or computer simulation or modeling that is 
the basis of the AEDM;
    (ii) Regarding the units tested that were used to validate the AEDM 
pursuant to paragraph (m)(2) of this section, equipment information, 
complete test data, AEDM calculations, and the statistical comparisons; 
and
    (iii) For each basic model to which the AEDM was applied, equipment 
information and AEDM calculations.
    (4) Additional AEDM requirements. If requested by the Department, 
the manufacturer must:
    (i) Conduct simulations before representatives of the Department to 
predict the performance of particular basic models of the equipment to 
which the AEDM was applied;
    (ii) Provide analyses of previous simulations conducted by the 
manufacturer; and/or
    (iii) Conduct certification testing of basic models selected by the 
Department.
    (5) AEDM verification testing. DOE may use the test data for a 
given individual model generated pursuant to Sec.  429.104 to verify 
the certified rating determined by an AEDM as long as the following 
process is followed:
    (i) Selection of units. DOE will obtain units for test from retail, 
where available. If units cannot be obtained from retail, DOE will 
request that a unit be provided by the manufacturer.
    (ii) Lab requirements. DOE will conduct testing at an independent, 
third-party testing facility of its choosing. In cases where no third-
party laboratory is capable of testing the equipment, it may be tested 
at a manufacturer's facility upon DOE's request.
    (iii) Manufacturer participation. Testing will be performed without 
manufacturer representatives on-site.
    (iv) Testing. All verification testing will be conducted in 
accordance with the applicable DOE test procedure, as well as each of 
the following to the extent that they apply:
    (A) Any active test procedure waivers that have been granted for 
the basic model;
    (B) Any test procedure guidance that has been issued by DOE;
    (C) If during test set-up or testing, the lab indicates to DOE that 
it needs additional information regarding a given basic model in order 
to test in accordance with the applicable DOE test procedure, DOE may 
organize a meeting between DOE, the manufacturer and the lab to provide 
such information.
    (D) At no time during the process may the lab communicate directly 
with the manufacturer without DOE present.
    (v) Failure to meet certified rating. If a model's test results are 
worse than its certified rating by an amount exceeding the tolerance 
prescribed in paragraph (f)(5)(vi) of this section, DOE will notify the 
manufacturer. DOE will provide the manufacturer with all documentation 
related to the test set up, test conditions, and test results for the 
unit. Within the timeframe allotted by DOE, the manufacturer may then 
present all claims regarding testing validity.
    (vi) Tolerances. For consumption metrics, the result from a DOE 
verification test must be less than or equal to the certified rating x 
(1 + the applicable tolerance).

                     Table 7 to Paragraph (m)(5)(vi)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Applicable
           Equipment                     Metric           tolerance  (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Pumps..................  Constant or Variable                 5
                                  Load Pump Energy
                                  Index.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (vii) Invalid rating. If, following discussions with the 
manufacturer and a retest where applicable, DOE determines that the 
testing was conducted appropriately in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure, the rating for the model will be considered invalid. The 
manufacturer must conduct additional testing and re-rate and re-certify 
the basic models that were rated using the AEDM based on all test data 
collected, including DOE's test data.
    (viii) AEDM use. This paragraph (m)(5)(viii) specifies when a 
manufacturer's use of an AEDM may be restricted due to prior invalid 
represented values.
    (A) If DOE has determined that a manufacturer made invalid ratings 
on two or more models rated using the same AEDM within a 24-month 
period, the manufacturer must take the action listed in the table 
corresponding to the number of invalid certified ratings. The twenty-
four month period begins with a DOE determination that a rating is 
invalid through the process outlined previously. Additional invalid 
ratings apply for the purposes of determining the appropriate 
consequences if the subsequent determination(s) is based on selection 
of a unit for testing within the twenty-four-month period (i.e., 
subsequent determinations need not be made within 24 months).

[[Page 17975]]



                  Table 8 to Paragraph (m)(5)(viii)(A)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Number of invalid certified
  ratings from the same AEDM \1\
 within a  rolling 24-month period      Required manufacturer actions
                \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.................................  Submit different test data and
                                     reports from testing to validate
                                     that AEDM within the validation
                                     classes to which it is applied.\3\
                                     Adjust the ratings as appropriate.
4.................................  Conduct double the minimum number of
                                     validation tests for the validation
                                     classes to which the AEDM is
                                     applied. Note, the tests required
                                     under this paragraph (m)(5)(viii)
                                     must be performed on different
                                     models than the original tests
                                     required under paragraph (m)(2) of
                                     this section.
6.................................  Conduct the minimum number of
                                     validation tests for the validation
                                     classes to which the AEDM is
                                     applied at a third-party test
                                     facility; And
                                    Conduct additional testing, which is
                                     equal to \1/2\ the minimum number
                                     of validation tests for the
                                     validation classes to which the
                                     AEDM is applied, at either the
                                     manufacturer's facility or a third-
                                     party test facility, at the
                                     manufacturer's discretion.
                                    Note, the tests required under this
                                     paragraph (m)(5)(viii) must be
                                     performed on different models than
                                     the original tests performed under
                                     paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
> = 8.............................  Manufacturer has lost privilege to
                                     use AEDM. All ratings for models
                                     within the validation classes to
                                     which the AEDM applied should be
                                     rated via testing. Distribution
                                     cannot continue until
                                     certification(s) are corrected to
                                     reflect actual test data.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ``same AEDM'' means a computer simulation or mathematical model
  that is identified by the manufacturer at the time of certification as
  having been used to rate a model or group of models.
\2\ The twenty-four month period begins with a DOE determination that a
  rating is invalid through the process outlined above. Additional
  invalid ratings apply for the purposes of determining the appropriate
  consequences if the subsequent determination(s) is based on testing of
  a unit that was selected for testing within the twenty-four month
  period (i.e., subsequent determinations need not be made within 24
  months).
\3\ A manufacturer may discuss with DOE's Office of Enforcement whether
  existing test data on different basic models within the validation
  classes to which that specific AEDM was applied may be used to meet
  this requirement.

    (B) If, as a result of eight or more invalid ratings, a 
manufacturer has lost the privilege of using an AEDM for rating, the 
manufacturer may regain the ability to use an AEDM by:
    (1) Investigating and identifying cause(s) for failures;
    (2) Taking corrective action to address cause(s);
    (3) Performing six new tests per validation class, a minimum of two 
of which must be performed by an independent, third-party laboratory to 
validate the AEDM; and
    (4) Obtaining DOE authorization to resume use of the AEDM.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 429.134 is amended by revising paragraph (i)(1)(ii):


Sec.  429.134   Product-specific enforcement provisions.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) DOE will test each pump unit according to the test method 
specified by the manufacturer in the certification report submitted 
pursuant to Sec.  429.59(b); if the model of pump unit was rated using 
an AEDM, DOE may use either a testing approach or calculation approach.
* * * * *

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

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

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


0
5. Amend Sec.  431.462 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text;
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Basic model'';
0
c. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``Bowl'';
0
d. Revising the definitions of ``Bowl diameter'', ``Close-coupled 
pump'', ``End suction close-coupled (ESCC) pump'', ``End suction frame 
mounted/own bearings (ESFM) pump'', ``End suction pump'', ``In-line 
(IL) pump'', and ``Mechanically-coupled pump'';
0
e. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Radially-split, 
multi-stage, horizontal, diffuser casing (RSH) pump'', ``Radially-
split, multi-stage, horizontal, end-suction diffuser casing (RSHES) 
pump'', and ``Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser 
casing (RSHIL) pump'';
0
f. Revising the definition of ``Radially-split, multi-stage, vertical, 
in-line diffuser casing (RSV) pump'';
0
g. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Small vertical in-
line (SVIL) pump'' and ``Small vertical twin-head pump'';
0
h. Revising the definition of ``Submersible turbine (ST) pump''; and
0
i. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``Vertical turbine 
pump''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  431.462   Definitions.

    The following definitions are applicable to this subpart, including 
appendices A, B, and C. In cases where definitions reference design 
intent, DOE will consider marketing materials, labels and 
certifications, and equipment design to determine design intent.
* * * * *
    Basic model means all units of a given class of pump manufactured 
by one manufacturer, having the same primary energy source, and having 
essentially identical electrical, physical, and functional (or 
hydraulic) characteristics that affect energy consumption, energy 
efficiency, water consumption, or water efficiency; and, in addition, 
for pumps that are subject to the test procedures specified in Sec.  
431.464(a), the following provisions also apply:
    (1) All variations in numbers of stages of bare RSV and ST pumps 
must be considered a single basic model;
    (2) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in impeller 
diameter and/or impeller trim, may be considered a single basic model; 
and
    (3) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in number of stages 
and/or impeller diameter and which are sold with motors (or motors and 
controls) of varying horsepower may only be considered a single basic 
model if:
    (i) For ESCC, ESFM, IL, and RSV pumps, each motor offered in the 
basic model has a nominal full load motor efficiency rated at the 
Federal minimum (see the applicable table at Sec.  431.25) or the same 
number of bands above the Federal minimum for each respective motor 
horsepower (see table 3 of appendix A to this subpart); or for pumps 
sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors, any number of 
bands above the Federal

[[Page 17976]]

minimum for each respective motor horsepower provided that the rating 
is based on the lowest number of bands; or
    (ii) For ST pumps, each motor offered in the basic model has a full 
load motor efficiency at the default nominal full load submersible 
motor efficiency shown in table 2 of appendix A to subpart Y of this 
part or the same number of bands above the default nominal full load 
submersible motor efficiency for each respective motor horsepower (see 
table 3 of appendix A to this subpart) or for inverter-only synchronous 
electric motors, any number of bands above the default nominal full 
load submersible motor efficiency provided the rating is based on the 
lowest number of bands.
* * * * *
    Bowl means a casing in which the impeller rotates, and that directs 
flow axially to the next stage or the discharge column.
    Bowl diameter means the maximum dimension of an imaginary straight 
line passing through and in the plane of the circular shape of the bowl 
of the bare pump that is perpendicular to the pump shaft and that 
intersects the outermost circular shape of the bowl of the bare pump at 
both of its ends.
* * * * *
    Close-coupled pump means a pump in which the driver's bearings are 
designed to absorb the pump's axial load.
* * * * *
    End-suction close-coupled (ESCC) pump means a close-coupled, dry 
rotor, end-suction pump that has a shaft input power greater than or 
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller 
diameter and that is not a dedicated-purpose pool pump.
    End-suction frame mounted/own bearings (ESFM) pump means a 
mechanically-coupled, dry rotor, end-suction pump that has a shaft 
input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 
hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and that is not a dedicated-
purpose pool pump.
    End-suction pump means a single-stage, rotodynamic pump in which 
the liquid enters the bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller 
shaft and on the side opposite the bare pump's driver-end. The liquid 
is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the shaft.
* * * * *
    In-line (IL) pump means a pump that is either a twin head pump or a 
single-stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that has a 
shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal 
to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter, in which liquid is 
discharged in a plane perpendicular to the shaft. Such pumps do not 
include circulator pumps.
* * * * *
    Mechanically-coupled pump means a pump in which bearings external 
to the driver are designed to absorb the pump's axial load.
* * * * *
    Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, diffuser casing (RSH) pump 
means a horizontal, multi-stage, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump:
    (1) That has a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and 
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at 
the number of stages required for testing;
    (2) In which liquid is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the 
impeller shaft;
    (3) For which each stage (or bowl) consists of an impeller and 
diffuser; and
    (4) For which no external part of such a pump is designed to be 
submerged in the pumped liquid.
    Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, end-suction diffuser 
casing (RSHES) pump means a RSH pump in which the liquid enters the 
bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller shaft and on the side 
opposite the bare pump's driver-end.
    Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser casing 
(RSHIL) pump means a single-axis flow RSH pump in which the liquid 
enters the pump in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.
    Radially-split, multi-stage, vertical, diffuser casing (RSV) pump 
means a vertically suspended, multi-stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, 
rotodynamic pump:
    (1) That has a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and 
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at 
the number of stages required for testing;
    (2) In which liquid is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the 
impeller shaft;
    (3) For which each stage (or bowl) consists of an impeller and 
diffuser; and
    (4) For which no external part of such a pump is designed to be 
submerged in the pumped liquid.
* * * * *
    Small vertical in-line (SVIL) pump means a small vertical twin-head 
pump or a single stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump 
that:
    (1) Has a shaft input power less than 1 horsepower at its BEP at 
full impeller diameter; and
    (2) In which liquid is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the 
shaft; and
    (3) Is not a circulator pump.
    Small vertical twin-head pump means a dry rotor, single-axis flow, 
rotodynamic pump that contains two equivalent impeller assemblies, each 
of which:
    (1) Contains an impeller, impeller shaft (or motor shaft in the 
case of close-coupled pumps), shaft seal or packing, driver (if 
present), and mechanical equipment (if present); and
    (2) Has a shaft input power that is less than or equal to 1 hp at 
BEP and full impeller diameter; and
    (3) Has the same primary energy source (if sold with a driver) and 
the same electrical, physical, and functional characteristics that 
affect energy consumption or energy efficiency; and
    (4) Is mounted in its own volute; and
    (5) Discharges liquid through its volute and the common discharge 
in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.
* * * * *
    Submersible turbine (ST) pump means a single-stage or multi-stage, 
dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that is designed to be operated with the 
motor and stage(s) fully submerged in the pumped liquid; that has a 
shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal 
to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at the number of stages 
required for testing; and in which each stage of this pump consists of 
an impeller and diffuser, and liquid enters and exits each stage of the 
bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller shaft.
* * * * *
    Vertical turbine (VT) pump means a vertically suspended, single-
stage or multi-stage, dry rotor, single inlet, rotodynamic pump:
    (1) That has a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and 
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at 
the number of stages required for testing;
    (2) For which the pump driver is not designed to be submerged in 
the pumped liquid;
    (3) That has a single pressure containing boundary (i.e., is single 
casing), which may consist of, but is not limited, to bowls, columns, 
and discharge heads; and
    (4) That discharges liquid through the same casing in which the 
impeller shaft is contained.
* * * * *

0
6. Revise Sec.  431.463 to read as follows:


Sec.  431.463  Materials incorporated by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subpart 
with the

[[Page 17977]]

approval of the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that 
specified in this section, DOE must publish a document in the Federal 
Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved 
incorporation by reference (IBR) is available for inspection at DOE, 
and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact 
DOE at: the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, Sixth Floor, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-9127, 
[email protected], https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/building-technologies-office. For information on the availability of this 
material at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html or email [email protected]. The material may be 
obtained from the following sources:
    (b) ASME. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Two Park 
Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990; (800) 843-2763; www.asme.org.
    (1) ASME MFC-3M-2004 (Reaffirmed 2017) (``ASME MFC-3M-2004''), 
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi, 
Issued January 1, 2004; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (2) ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 2006) (``ASME MFC-5M-1985''), 
Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time 
Ultrasonic Flowmeters, Issued July 15, 1985; IBR approved for appendix 
A to this subpart.
    (3) ASME MFC-8M-2001 (Reaffirmed 2011) (``ASME MFC-8M-2001''), 
Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits: Connections for Pressure Signal 
Transmissions Between Primary and Secondary Devices, Issued September 
1, 2001; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (4) ASME MFC-12M-2006 (Reaffirmed 2014) (``ASME MFC-12M-2006''), 
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits Using Multiport Averaging 
Pitot Primary Elements, Issued October 9, 2006; IBR approved for 
appendix A to this subpart.
    (5) ASME MFC-16-2014, Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits 
with Electromagnetic Flowmeters, Issued March 14, 2014; IBR approved 
for appendix A to this subpart.
    (6) ASME MFC-22-2007 (Reaffirmed 2014) (``ASME MFC-22-2007''), 
Measurement of Liquid by Turbine Flowmeters, Issued April 14, 2008; IBR 
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (c) AWWA. American Water Works Association, Headquarters, 6666 W 
Quincy Ave, Denver, CO 80235; (303) 794-7711; www.awwa.org.
    (1) ANSI/AWWA E103-2015 (``AWWA E103-2015''), Horizontal and 
Vertical Line-Shaft Pumps, approved 7, 2015; IBR approved for appendix 
A to this subpart.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) CSA. Canadian Standards Association, 5060 Spectrum Way, Suite 
100, Mississauga, Ontario, L4W 5N6, Canada; (800) 463-6727; 
www.csagroup.org.
    (1) CSA C390-10 Test methods, marking requirements, and energy 
efficiency levels for three-phase induction motors, Updated March 2010; 
IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (2) CSA C747-2009 (Reaffirmed 2014) (``CSA C747-2009 (RA 2014)''), 
Energy efficiency test methods for small motors, CSA reaffirmed 2014; 
IBR approved for appendices B and C to this subpart, as follows:
    (i) Section 1, ``Scope'';
    (ii) Section 3, ``Definitions'';
    (iii) Section 5, ``General Test Requirements''; and
    (iv) Section 6, ``Test Method.''
    (e) FM. FM Global, 1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike, P.O. Box 9102, 
Norwood, MA 02062; (781) 762-4300; www.fmglobal.com.
    (1) FM Class Number 1319, Approval Standard for Centrifugal Fire 
Pumps (Horizontal, End Suction Type), January 2015; IBR approved for 
Sec.  431.462.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (f) HI. Hydraulic Institute, 300 Interpace Parkway, 3rd Floor, 
Parsippany, NJ 07054-4406; 973-267-9700; www.Pumps.org.
    (1) ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017 (``HI 9.6.1-2017'') ``Rotodynamic Pumps--
Guideline for NPSH Margin, ANSI-approved January 6, 2017; IBR approved 
for appendix A to this subpart.
    (2) ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016 (``HI 9.6.6-2016'') ``Rotodynamic Pumps for 
Pump Piping, ANSI-approved March 23, 2016; IBR approved for appendix A 
to this subpart.
    (3) ANSI/HI 9.8-2018 (``HI 9.8-2018'') ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump 
Intake Design, ANSI-approved January 8, 2018; IBR approved for appendix 
A to this subpart.
    (4) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 (``HI 14.1-14.2-2019'') ``Rotodynamic 
Pumps for Nomenclature and Definitions, ANSI-approved April 9, 2019; 
IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (5) HI 40.6-2014 (``HI 40.6-2014-B''), Methods for Rotodynamic Pump 
Efficiency Testing, copyright 2014, IBR approved for appendices B and C 
to this subpart, excluding the following:
    (i) Section 40.6.4.1 ``Vertically suspended pumps'';
    (ii) Section 40.6.4.2 ``Submersible pumps'';
    (iii) Section 40.6.5.3 ``Test report'';
    (iv) Section 40.6.5.5 ``Test conditions'';
    (v) Section 40.6.5.5.2 ``Speed of rotation during test'';
    (vi) Section 40.6.6.1 ``Translation of test results to rated speed 
of rotation'';
    (vii) Appendix A ``Test arrangements (normative)'': A.7 ``Testing 
at temperatures exceeding 30 [deg]C (86 [deg]F)''; and
    (viii) Appendix B, ``Reporting of test results (normative)'').
    (6) HI 40.6-2021, Hydraulic Institute Standard for Methods for 
Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing, approved February 17, 2021; IBR 
approved for appendices A and D to this subpart.
    (7) HI 41.5-2022, Hydraulic Institute Program Guideline for 
Circulator Pump Energy Rating Program, approved June 16, 2022; IBR 
approved for appendix D to this subpart.
    (8) HI Engineering Data Book, Second Edition copyright 1990; IBR 
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (g) IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 
45 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331; (732) 981-0060; 
www.ieee.org.
    (1) IEEE 112-2017, IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase 
Induction Motors and Generators, published February 14, 2018; IBR 
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (2) IEEE 113-1985, IEEE Guide: Test Procedures for Direct-Current 
Machines,'' copyright 1985, IBR approved for appendices B and C to this 
subpart, as follows:
    (i) Section 3, Electrical Measurements and Power Sources for all 
Test Procedures:
    (A) Section 3.1, ``Instrument Selection Factors'';
    (B) Section 3.4 ``Power Measurement''; and
    (C) Section 3.5 ``Power Sources'';
    (ii) Section 4, Preliminary Tests:
    (A) Section 4.1, Reference Conditions, Section 4.1.2, ``Ambient 
Air''; and
    (B) Section 4.1, Reference Conditions, Section 4.1.4 ``Direction of 
Rotation''; and
    (iii) Section 5, Performance Determination:
    (A) Section 5.4, Efficiency, Section 5.4.1, ``Reference 
Conditions''; and
    (B) Section 5.4.3, Direct Measurements of Input and Output, Section 
5.4.3.2 ``Dynomometer or Torquemeter Method.''

[[Page 17978]]

    (3) IEEE 114-2010 (``IEEE 114-2010-A''), IEEE Standard Test 
Procedure for Single-Phase Induction Motors, published December 23, 
2010; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (3) IEEE 114-2010 (``IEEE 114-2010''), ``IEEE Standard Test 
Procedure for Single-Phase Induction Motors,'' approved September 30, 
2010, IBR approved for appendices B and C to this subpart, as follows:
    (i) Section 3, ``General tests'', Section 3.2, ``Tests with load'';
    (ii) Section 4 ``Testing facilities''; and
    (iii) Section 5, ``Measurements'':
    (A) Section 5.2 ``Mechanical measurements'';
    (B) Section 5.3 ``Temperature measurements''; and
    (iv) Section 6 ``Tests.''
    (h) ISO. International Organization for Standardization, Chemin de 
Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 
11. www.iso.org.
    (1) ISO 1438:2017(E) (``ISO 1438:2017''), Hydrometry--Open channel 
flow measurement using thin-plate weirs, Third edition, April 2017; IBR 
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (2) ISO 2186:2007(E) (``ISO 2186:2007''), Fluid flow in closed 
conduits--Connections for pressure signal transmissions between primary 
and secondary elements, Second edition, March 1, 2007; IBR approved for 
appendix A to this subpart.
    (3) ISO 2715:2017(E) (``ISO 2715:2017''), Liquid hydrocarbons--
Volumetric measurement by turbine flowmeter, Second edition, November 
1, 2017; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (4) ISO 3354:2008(E) (``ISO 3354:2008''), Measurement of clean 
water flow in closed conduits--Velocity-area method using current-
meters in full conduits and under regular flow conditions, Third 
edition, July 15, 2008; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (5) ISO 3966:2020(E) (``ISO 3966:2020''), Measurement of fluid flow 
in closed conduits--Velocity area method using Pitot static tubes, 
Third edition, July 27, 2020; IBR approved for appendix A to this 
subpart.
    (6) ISO 5167-1:2003(E) (``ISO 5167-1:2003''), Measurement of fluid 
flow by means of pressure differential devices inserted in circular 
cross-section conduits running full--Part 1: General principles and 
requirements, Second edition, March 1, 2003; IBR approved for appendix 
A to this subpart.
    (7) ISO 5198:1987(E) (``ISO 5198:1987''), Centrifugal, mixed flow 
and axial pumps--Code for hydraulic performance tests--Precision class, 
First edition, July 1, 1987; IBR approved for appendix A to this 
subpart.
    (8) ISO 6416:2017(E) (``ISO 6416:2017''), Hydrometry--Measurement 
of discharge by the ultrasonic transit time (time of flight) method, 
Fourth edition, October 2017; IBR approved for appendix A to this 
subpart.
    (9) ISO 20456:2017(E) (``ISO 20456:2017''), Measurement of fluid 
flow in closed conduits--Guidance for the use of electromagnetic 
flowmeters for conductive liquids, First edition, September 2017; IBR 
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
    (i) NFPA. National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch 
Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471; (617) 770-3000; www.nfpa.org.
    (1) NFPA 20 (``NFPA 20-2016''), Standard for the Installation of 
Stationary Pumps for Fire Protection, 2016 Edition, approved June 15, 
2015, IBR approved for Sec.  431.462.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (j) NSF. NSF International, 789 N. Dixboro Road, Ann Arbor, MI 
48105; (743) 769-8010; www.nsf.org.
    (1) NSF/ANSI 50-2015, Equipment for Swimming Pools, Spas, Hot Tubs 
and Other Recreational Water Facilities, Annex C, normative Test 
methods for the evaluation of centrifugal pumps, Section C.3, Self-
priming capability, ANSI-approved January 26, 2015; IBR approved for 
Sec.  431.462 and appendices B and C to this subpart.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (k) UL. UL, 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062; (847) 272-
8800; www.ul.com.
    (1) UL 448 (``ANSI/UL 448-2013''), Standard for Safety Centrifugal 
Stationary Pumps for Fire-Protection Service, 10th Edition, June 8, 
2007, including revisions through July 12, 2013; IBR approved for Sec.  
431.462.
    (2) UL 1081 (``ANSI/UL 1081-2016''), Standard for Swimming Pool 
Pumps, Filters, and Chlorinators, 7th Edition, ANSI-approved October 
21, 2016; IBR approved for Sec.  431.462.

0
7. Section 431.464 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through 
(iii) to read as follows:


Sec.  431.464  Test procedure for the measurement of energy efficiency, 
energy consumption, and other performance factors of pumps.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The following categories of clean water pumps that have the 
characteristics listed in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section.
    (A) End suction close-coupled (ESCC);
    (B) End suction frame mounted/own bearings (ESFM);
    (C) In-line (IL);
    (D) Radially split, multi-stage, vertical, in-line casing diffuser 
(RSV); and
    (E) Submersible turbine (ST) pumps.
    (ii) The additional following categories of clean water pumps that 
have the characteristics listed in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this 
section:
    (A) Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, end-suction diffuser 
casing (RSHES);
    (B) Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser 
casing (RSHIL);
    (C) Small vertical in-line (SVIL); and
    (D) Vertical Turbine (VT).
    (iii) Pump characteristics:
    (A) Flow rate of 25 gpm or greater at BEP and full impeller 
diameter;
    (B) Maximum head of 459 feet at BEP and full impeller diameter and 
the number of stages required for testing (see section 1.2.2 of 
appendix A of this subpart);
    (C) Design temperature range wholly or partially in the range of 15 
to 250 [deg]F;
    (D) Designed to operate with either:
    (1) A 2- or 4- or 6-pole induction motor, or
    (2) A non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating range 
that includes speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 revolutions 
per minute (rpm) and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm and/or 960 and 1,439 
revolutions per minute, and in each case, the driver and impeller must 
rotate at the same speed;
    (E) For ST, and VT pumps, a 6-inch or smaller bowl diameter; and
    (F) For ESCC, and ESFM pumps, a specific speed less than or equal 
to 5,000 when calculated using U.S. customary units.
* * * * *

0
8. Appendix A to subpart Y of part 431 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the note to the beginning of the appendix;
0
b. Revising section I;
0
c. In section II,
0
i. Revising paragraphs A.1, A.2, B.1.1.1.1, B.1.2.1.2, B.1.2.1.2.1., 
and B.1.2.1.2.2; and
0
ii. Adding paragraph B.1.2.1.2.3;
0
d. In section III, revising paragraphs A through D, E.1.2.1.2, 
E.1.2.1.2.1., and E.1.2.1.2.2.;
0
e. In section IV, revising paragraphs A through D;
0
f. In section V, revising paragraphs A through D, E.1.1, E.1.2.1.1, 
E.1.2.1.1.1. and E.1.2.1.1.2.;
0
g. In section VI, revising paragraphs A through D;

[[Page 17979]]

0
h. In section VII,
0
i. Revising paragraphs A through D, the definition of L full 
in paragraph E.1.2, paragraphs E.1.2.1, E.1.2.1.1, E.1.2.1.1.1, and 
E.1.2.1.1.2,
0
ii. Adding paragraph E.1.2.1.1.3; and
0
iii. Revising paragraph E.1.2.2;
0
i. Revising Tables 2 and 4; and
0
j. Adding Table 5.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart Y of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the 
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Pumps

    Note: Prior to September 20, 2023, representations with respect 
to the energy use or efficiency (including compliance 
certifications) of pumps specified in Sec.  431.464(a)(1)(i), 
excluding pumps listed in Sec.  431.464(a)(1)(iv), must be based on 
testing conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of 
this appendix as they appeared in the January 1, 2022 edition of the 
Code of Federal Regulations of subpart Y of part 431 in 10 CFR parts 
200 through 499.
    On or after September 20, 2023, representations with respect to 
the energy use or efficiency (including compliance certifications) 
of pumps specified in Sec.  431.464(a)(1)(i), excluding pumps listed 
in Sec.  431.464(a)(1)(iv), must be based on testing conducted in 
accordance with the applicable provisions of this appendix.
    Any representations with respect to the energy use or efficiency 
of pumps specified in Sec.  431.464(a)(1)(ii), excluding pumps 
listed in Sec.  431.464(a)(1)(iv), made on or after September 20, 
2023 must be made in accordance with the results of testing pursuant 
to this appendix. Manufacturers must use the results of testing 
under this appendix to determine compliance with any energy 
conservation standards established for pumps specified in Sec.  
431.464(a)(1)(ii), excluding pumps listed in Sec.  
431.464(a)(1)(iv), that are published after January 1, 2022.

I. Test Procedure for Pumps

    0. Incorporation by Reference.
    DOE incorporated by reference in Sec.  431.463 the entire 
standard for HI 40.6-2021, HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-
2018, HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data Book, ASME MFC-5M-
1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME 
MFC-16-2014, ASME MFC-22-2007, AWWA E103-2015, CSA C390-10, IEEE 
112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 
2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 
5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017; however, certain 
enumerated provisions of HI 40.6-2021, as follows are inapplicable. 
To the extent that there is a conflict between the terms or 
provisions of a referenced industry standard and the CFR, the CFR 
provisions control.
    0.1 HI 40.6-2021
    (a) Section 40.6.1 Scope
    (b) Section 40.6.5.3 Test report
    (c) Appendix B Reporting of test results (informative)
    (d) Appendix E Testing Circulator Pumps (normative)
    (e) Appendix G DOE Compared to HI 40.6 Nomenclature
    0.2 [Reserved]
    A. General. To determine the constant load pump energy index 
(PEICL) for bare pumps and pumps sold with electric 
motors or the variable load pump energy index (PEIVL) for 
pumps sold with electric motors and continuous or non-continuous 
controls, perform testing in accordance with HI 40.6-2021, except 
section 40.6.5.3, ``Test report'', including the applicable 
provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, HI 14.1-
14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data Book, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-
5M-1985, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME 
MFC-22-2007, AWWA E103-2015, CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-
2010-A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, 
ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and 
ISO 20456:2017, as referenced in HI 40.6, with the modifications and 
additions as noted throughout the provisions below. Where HI 40.6-
2021 refers to ``pump,'' the term refers to the ``bare pump,'' as 
defined in Sec.  431.462. Also, for the purposes of applying this 
appendix, the term ``volume per unit time,'' as defined in section 
40.6.2, ``Terms and definitions,'' of HI 40.6-2021 shall be deemed 
to be synonymous with the term ``flow rate'' used throughout that 
standard and this appendix. In addition, the specifications in 
section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6-2021, ``Vertically suspended pumps,'' do 
not apply to ST pumps and the performance of ST bare pumps considers 
bowl performance only. However, the specifications in the first 
paragraph of section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the 
applicable provisions of HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data 
Book, and AWWA E103-2015, as referenced in section 40.6.4.1 of HI 
40.6), ``Vertically suspended pumps,'' do apply to VT pumps and the 
performance of VT bare pumps considers bowl performance only.
    A.1 Scope. Section II of this appendix applies to all pumps and 
describes how to calculate the pump energy index (section II.A) 
based on the pump energy rating for the minimally-compliant 
reference pump (PERSTD; section II.B) and the constant 
load pump energy rating (PERCL) or variable load pump 
energy rating (PERVL) determined in accordance with one 
of sections III through VII of this appendix, based on the 
configuration in which the pump is distributed in commerce and the 
applicable testing method specified in sections III through VII and 
as described in Table 1 of this appendix.

   Table 1--Applicability of Calculation-Based and Testing-Based Test
              Procedure Options Based on Pump Configuration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Applicable test
      Pump configuration        Pump sub-configuration       methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bare Pump.....................  Bare Pump OR Pump +     Section III:
                                 Single-Phase            Test Procedure
                                 Induction Motor         for Bare Pumps.
                                 (Excluding SVIL) OR
                                 Pump + Driver Other
                                 Than Electric Motor.
Pump + Motor OR Pump + Motor +  Pump + Motor Listed at  Section IV:
 Controls other than             Sec.   431.25(g) OR     Testing-Based
 continuous or non-continuous    SVIL Pump + Motor       Approach for
 controls (e.g., ON/OFF          Covered by DOE's Test   Pumps Sold with
 switches).                      Procedure and/or        Motors OR
                                 Energy Conservation     Section V:
                                 Standards * OR Pump +   Calculation-
                                 Submersible Motor.      Based Approach
                                                         for Pumps Sold
                                                         with Motors.
                                Pump (Including SVIL)   Section IV:
                                 + Motor Not Covered     Testing-Based
                                 by DOE's Motor Energy   Approach for
                                 Conservation            Pumps Sold with
                                 Standards (Except       Motors.
                                 Submersible Motors)
                                 ** OR Pump (Other
                                 than SVIL) + Single-
                                 Phase Induction Motor
                                 (if Section III is
                                 not used).
Pump + Motor + Continuous       Pump + Motor Listed at  Section VI:
 Controls OR Pump + Motor +      Sec.   431.25(g) +      Testing-Based
 Non-Continuous Controls OR      Continuous Control OR   Approach for
 Pump + Inverter-Only            SVIL Pump + Motor       Pumps Sold with
 Synchronous Electric Motor      Covered by DOE's Test   Motors and
 *** (With or Without            Procedure and/or        Controls OR
 Controls).                      Energy Conservation     Section VII:
                                 Standards * +           Calculation-
                                 Continuous Control OR   Based Approach
                                 Pump + Submersible      for Pumps Sold
                                 Motor + Continuous      with Motors
                                 Control OR Pump +       Controls.
                                 Inverter-Only
                                 Synchronous Electric
                                 Motor *** (With or
                                 Without Continuous
                                 Control).
                                Pump + Motor Listed at  Section VI:
                                 Sec.   431.25(g) +      Testing-Based
                                 Non-Continuous          Approach for
                                 Control OR SVIL Pump    Pumps Sold with
                                 + Motor Covered by      Motors and
                                 DOE's Test Procedure    Controls.
                                 and/or Energy
                                 Conservation
                                 Standards * + Non-
                                 Continuous Control OR
                                 Pump + Submersible
                                 Motor + Non-
                                 Continuous Control.

[[Page 17980]]

 
                                Pump (Including SVIL)   Section VI:
                                 + Motor Not Covered     Testing-Based
                                 by DOE's Motor Test     Approach for
                                 Procedure and/or        Pumps Sold with
                                 Energy Conservation     Motors and
                                 Standards ** (Except    Controls.
                                 Submersible Motors) +
                                 Continuous or Non-
                                 Continuous Controls
                                 OR Pump (Other than
                                 SVIL) + Single-Phase
                                 Induction Motor +
                                 Continuous or Non-
                                 Continuous Controls
                                 (if Section III is
                                 not used).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All references to ``Motor Covered by DOE's Motor Test Procedure and/or
  Energy Conservation Standards'' refer to those listed at Sec.
  431.446 of this chapter or those for Small Non-Small Electric Motor
  Electric Motors (SNEMs) at Subpart B to Part 431, including motors of
  such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp.
** All references to ``Motor Not Covered by DOE's Test Procedure and/or
  Motor Energy Conservation Standards'' refer to motors not listed at
  Sec.   431.25 of this chapter or, for SVIL, not listed at either Sec.
   431.446 of this chapter or in Subpart B to Part 431 (excluding motors
  of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp).
*** All references to ``Inverter-Only Synchronous Electric Motor'' refer
  to inverter-only electric motors that are synchronous electric motors,
  both as defined in subpart B to Part 431.

    A.2 Section III of this appendix addresses the test procedure 
applicable to bare pumps. This test procedure also applies to pumps 
sold with drivers other than motors and ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, 
RSHIL, RSV, ST, and VT pumps sold with single-phase induction 
motors.
    A.3 Section IV of this appendix addresses the testing-based 
approach for pumps sold with motors, which applies to all pumps sold 
with electric motors, except for pumps sold with inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors, but including pumps sold with single-
phase induction motors. This test procedure also applies to pumps 
sold with controls other than continuous or non-continuous controls 
(e.g., on/off switches).
    A.4 Section V of this appendix addresses the calculation-based 
approach for pumps sold with motors, which applies to:
    A.4.1 Pumps sold with polyphase electric motors regulated by 
DOE's energy conservation standards for electric motors at Sec.  
431.25(g), and
    A.4.2 SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by 
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec.  431.446 or sold with 
SNEMs regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation 
standards in subpart B of this part but including motors of such 
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp, and
    A.4.3 Pumps sold with submersible motors.
    A.5 Section VI of this appendix addresses the testing-based 
approach for pumps sold with motors and controls, which applies to 
all pumps sold with electric motors (including single-phase 
induction motors) and continuous or non-continuous controls and to 
pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors with or 
without controls.
    A.6 Section VII of this appendix discusses the calculation-based 
approach for pumps sold with motors and controls, which applies to:
    A.6.1 Pumps sold with polyphase electric motors regulated by 
DOE's energy conservation standards for electric motors at Sec.  
431.25(g) and continuous controls and
    A.6.2 Pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors 
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation 
standards in subpart B of this part,
    A.6.3 SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by 
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec.  431.446 (but including 
motors of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and continuous 
controls or with SNEMs regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or 
energy conservation standards at subpart B of this part (but 
including motors of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and 
continuous controls, and
    A.6.4 Pumps sold with submersible motors and continuous 
controls.
    B. Measurement Equipment.
    B.1 Instrument Accuracy. For the purposes of measuring pump 
power input, driver power input to the motor or controls, and pump 
power output, the equipment specified in HI 40.6-2021 Appendix C 
(including the applicable provisions of ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-
3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME 
MFC-22-2007, CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, ISO 
1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 
3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO 
20456:2017, as referenced in Appendix C of HI 40.6) necessary to 
measure head, speed of rotation, flow rate, temperature, torque, and 
electrical power must be used and must comply with the stated 
accuracy requirements in HI 40.6-2021 Table 40.6.3.2.3 except as 
noted in sections III.B, IV.B, V.B, VI.B, and VII.B of this 
appendix. When more than one instrument is used to measure a given 
parameter, the combined accuracy, calculated as the root sum of 
squares of individual instrument accuracies, must meet the specified 
accuracy requirements.
    B.2 Calibration. Calibration requirements for instrumentation 
are specified in Appendix D of HI 40.6-2021.
    C. Test Conditions. Conduct testing at full impeller diameter in 
accordance with the test conditions, stabilization requirements, and 
specifications of HI 40.6-2021 Section 40.6.3, ``Pump efficiency 
testing;'' Section 40.6.4, ``Considerations when determining the 
efficiency of certain pumps'' including the applicable provisions of 
HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data Book, and AWWA E103-2015, 
as referenced in section 40.6.4 of HI 40.6; section 40.6.5.4 
(including appendix A), ``Test arrangements,'' including the 
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, 
HI Engineering Data Book, and AWWA E103-2015 as referenced in 
appendix A of HI 40.6; and section 40.6.5.5, ``Test conditions'' 
including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as referenced 
in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021. For ST pumps, head 
measurements must be based on the bowl assembly total head as 
described in section A.5 of 40.6-2021, including the applicable 
provisions of the HI Engineering Data Book and AWWA E103-2015 as 
referenced in ins section A.5 of HI 40.6-2021, and the pump power 
input or driver power input, as applicable, must be based on the 
measured input power to the driver or bare pump, respectively; 
section 40.6.4.1, ``Vertically suspended pumps,'' does not apply to 
ST pumps.
    C.1 Nominal Speed of Rotation. Determine the nominal speed of 
rotation based on the range of speeds of rotation at which the pump 
is designed to operate, in accordance with sections I.C.1.1, 
I.C.1.2, and I.C.1.3 of this appendix, as applicable. When 
determining the range of speeds at which the pump is designed to 
operate, DOE will refer to published data, marketing literature, and 
other publicly-available information about the pump model and motor, 
as applicable.
    C.1.1 For pumps sold without motors, select the nominal speed of 
rotation based on the speed for which the pump is designed.
    C.1.1.1 For bare pumps designed for speeds of rotation including 
2,880 to 4,320 revolutions per minute (rpm), the nominal speed of 
rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
    C.1.1.2 For bare pumps designed for speeds of rotation including 
1,440 to 2,160 rpm, the nominal speed of rotation shall be 1,800 
rpm.
    C.1.1.3 For bare pumps designed for speeds of rotation including 
960 to 1,439 rpm, the nominal speed of rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
    C.1.2 For pumps sold with induction motors, select the 
appropriate nominal speed of rotation.
    C.1.2.1 For pumps sold with 6-pole induction motors, the nominal 
speed of rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
    C.1.2.2 For pumps sold with 4-pole induction motors, the nominal 
speed of rotation shall be 1,800 rpm.

[[Page 17981]]

    C.1.2.3 For pumps sold with 2-pole induction motors, the nominal 
speed of rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
    C.1.3 For pumps sold with non-induction motors, select the 
appropriate nominal speed of rotation.
    C.1.3.1 Where the operating range of the pump and motor includes 
speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 rpm, the nominal speed of 
rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
    C.1.3.2 Where the operating range of the pump and motor includes 
speeds of rotation between 1,440 and 2,160 rpm, the nominal speed of 
rotation shall be 1,800 rpm.
    C.1.3.3 Where the operating range of the pump and motor includes 
speeds of rotation between 960 and 1,439, the nominal speed of 
rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
    C.2 Multi-Stage Pumps. Perform testing on the pump with three 
stages for RSH and RSV pumps, and nine stages for ST and VT pumps. 
If the basic model of pump being tested is only available with fewer 
than the required number of stages, test the pump with the maximum 
number of stages with which the basic model is distributed in 
commerce in the United States. If the basic model of pump being 
tested is only available with greater than the required number of 
stages, test the pump with the lowest number of stages with which 
the basic model is distributed in commerce in the United States. If 
the basic model of pump being tested is available with both fewer 
and greater than the required number of stages, but not the required 
number of stages, test the pump with the number of stages closest to 
the required number of stages. If both the next lower and next 
higher number of stages are equivalently close to the required 
number of stages, test the pump with the next higher number of 
stages.
    C.3 Twin-Head Pumps. For twin-head pumps, perform testing on an 
equivalent single impeller IL or SVIL pump as applicable, 
constructed by incorporating one of the driver and impeller 
assemblies of the twin-head pump being rated into an adequate IL-
style or SVIL-style, single impeller volute and casing. An adequate 
IL-style or SVIL-style, single impeller volute and casing means a 
volute and casing for which any physical and functional 
characteristics that affect energy consumption and energy efficiency 
are the same as their corresponding characteristics for a single 
impeller in the twin-head pump volute and casing.
    D. Data Collection and Analysis.
    D.1 Damping Devices. Use of damping devices, as described in 
section 40.6.3.2.2 of HI 40.6-2021, are only permitted to integrate 
up to the data collection interval used during testing.
    D.2 Stabilization. Record data at any tested load point only 
under stabilized conditions, as defined in HI 40.6-2021 section 
40.6.5.5.1, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as 
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6, where a minimum of two 
measurements are used to determine stabilization.
    D.3 Calculations and Rounding. Normalize all measured data to 
the nominal speed of rotation of 3,600 or 1,800 or 1,200 rpm based 
on the nominal speed of rotation selected for the pump in section 
I.C.1 of this appendix, in accordance with the procedures specified 
in section 40.6.6.1.1 of HI 40.6-2021. Except for the ``expected BEP 
flow rate,'' all terms and quantities refer to values determined in 
accordance with the procedures set forth in this appendix for the 
rated pump. Perform all calculations using raw measured values 
without rounding. Round PER CL and PER VL to 
three significant digits, and round PEI CL, and PEI 
VL values, as applicable, to the hundredths place (i.e., 
0.01).
    D.4 Pumps with BEP at Run Out. Test pumps for which the expected 
BEP corresponds to a volume rate of flow that is within 20 percent 
of the expected maximum flow rate at which the pump is designed to 
operate continuously or safely (i.e., pumps with BEP at run-out) in 
accordance with the test procedure specified in this appendix, but 
with the following exceptions:
    D.4.1 Use the following seven flow points--40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 
90, and 100 percent of the expected maximum flow rate for 
determination of BEP in sections III.D, IV.D, V.D, VI.D, and VII.D 
of this appendix instead of the flow points specified in those 
sections.
    D.4.2 Use flow points of 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100 percent of the 
expected maximum flow rate of the pump to determine pump power input 
or driver power input instead of the flow points of 60, 75, 90, 100, 
110, and 120 percent of the expected BEP flow rate specified in 
sections III.E.1.1, IV.E.1, V.E.1.1, VI.E.1, and VII.E.1.1 of this 
appendix.
    D.4.3 To determine PER CL in sections III.E, IV.E, 
and V.E and to determine PER STD in section II.B, use 
load points of 65, 90, and 100 percent of the BEP flow rate 
determined with the modified flow points specified in this section 
I.D.4 of this appendix instead of 75, 100, and 110 percent of BEP 
flow. In section II.B.1.1, where alpha values are specified for the 
load points 75, 100, and 110 percent of BEP flow rate, instead apply 
the alpha values to the load points of 65, 90, and 100 percent of 
the BEP flow rate determined with the modified flow points specified 
in this section I.D.4 of this appendix. However, in sections 
II.B.1.1.1 and II.B.1.1.1.1 of this appendix, use 100 percent of the 
BEP flow rate as specified to determine [eta]pump,STD and 
Ns as specified. To determine motor sizing for bare pumps in 
sections II.B.1.2.1.1 and III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, use a load 
point of 100 percent of the BEP flow rate instead of 120 percent.

II. Calculation of the Pump Energy Index

    A. * * *
    A.1. For pumps rated as bare pumps or pumps sold with motors 
(other than inverter-only synchronous electric motors), determine 
the PEI CL using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.004

Where:

PEI CL = the pump energy index for a constant load (hp),
PER CL = the pump energy rating for a constant load (hp), 
determined in accordance with either section III (for bare pumps; 
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, ST or VT pumps sold with single-
phase induction motors; and pumps sold with drivers other than 
electric motors), section IV (for pumps sold with motors and rated 
using the testing-based approach), or section V (for pumps sold with 
motors and rated using the calculation-based approach) of this 
appendix, and
PER STD = the PER CL for a pump that is 
minimally compliant with DOE's energy conservation standards with 
the same flow and specific speed characteristics as the tested pump 
(hp), as determined in accordance with section II.B of this 
appendix.

    A.2 For pumps rated as pumps sold with motors and continuous 
controls or non-continuous controls (including pumps sold with 
inverter-only synchronous electric motors with or without controls), 
determine the PEI VL using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.005

PEI VL = the pump energy index for a variable load (hp),
PER VL = the pump energy rating for a variable load (hp), 
determined in accordance with section VI (for pumps sold with motors 
and continuous or non-continuous controls rated using the testing-
based approach) or section VII of this appendix (for pumps sold with 
motors and continuous controls rated using the calculation-based 
approach), and
PER STD = the PER CL for a pump that is 
minimally compliant with DOE's energy conservation standards with 
the same flow and specific speed characteristics as the tested pump 
(hp), as determined in accordance with section II.B of this 
appendix.

    B. * * *
    B.1.1.1.1 Determine the specific speed of the rated pump using 
the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.006

Where:

Ns = specific speed,
nsp = the nominal speed of rotation (rpm),
Q'100 = the measured BEP flow rate of the tested 
pump at full impeller and nominal speed of rotation (gpm),
H100 = pump total head at 100 percent of the BEP 
flow rate of the tested pump at full impeller and nominal speed of 
rotation (ft), and
S = the number of stages with which the pump is being rated

B.1.2.1.2 Determine the default nominal full load motor efficiency 
as described in

[[Page 17982]]

section II.B.1.2.1.2.1 of this appendix for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, 
RSHIL, RSV, and VT pumps; section II.B.1.2.1.2.2 of this appendix 
for ST pumps; and section II.B.1.2.1.2.3 for SVIL pumps.
    B.1.2.1.2.1. For ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and VT 
pumps, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the minimum 
of the nominal full load motor efficiency standards (open or 
enclosed) from the table containing the current energy conservation 
standards for NEMA Design B motors at Sec.  431.25, with the number 
of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being tested 
(see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower 
determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
    B.1.2.1.2.2. For ST pumps, prior to the compliance date of any 
energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart B of 
this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the 
default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency listed in 
table 2 of this appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the 
speed at which the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this 
appendix) and the motor horsepower determined in section 
II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix. Starting on the compliance date of 
any energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart 
B of this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency shall 
be the minimum of any nominal full load motor efficiency standard 
from the table containing energy conservation standards for 
submersible motors in subpart B of this part, with the number of 
poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being tested (see 
section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower determined 
in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
    B.1.2.1.2.3. For SVIL pumps, the default nominal full load motor 
efficiency is the minimum full load motor efficiency standard from 
the tables containing the current energy conservation standards for 
polyphase or CSCR/CSIR small electric motors at Sec.  431.446, with 
the number of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being 
tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower 
determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, or for SVIL 
pumps sold with motors less than 0.25 hp, the default nominal full 
load motor efficiency is 58.3% for 6-pole, 64.6% for 4-pole, and 
61.7% for 2-pole motors.
* * * * *

III. Test Procedure for Bare Pumps

    A. Scope. This section III applies only to:
    A.1 Bare pumps,
    A.2 Pumps sold with drivers other than electric motors, and
    A.3 ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, ST, and VT pumps sold 
with single-phase induction motors.
    B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement 
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this 
section III. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated 
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements 
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable 
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as 
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall 
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and 
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
    C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions 
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section III. 
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the 
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021 shall be met, 
including the applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, 
IEEE 114-2010-A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point 
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
    D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the 
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of 
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal 
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as 
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the 
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency 
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power 
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section 
40.6.6.2 of HI 40.6-2021.
* * * * *
    E.1.2.1.2 Determine the default nominal full load motor 
efficiency as described in section III.E.1.2.1.2.1 of this appendix 
for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and VT pumps; or section 
III.E.1.2.1.2.2. of this appendix for ST pumps; or section 
III.E.1.2.1.2.3 of this appendix for SVIL pumps.
    E.1.2.1.2.1. For ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and VT 
pumps, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the minimum 
of the nominal full load motor efficiency standards (open or 
enclosed) from the table containing the current energy conservation 
standards for NEMA Design B motors at Sec.  431.25, with the number 
of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being tested 
(see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower 
determined in section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
    E.1.2.1.2.2. For ST pumps, prior to the compliance date of any 
energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart B of 
this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the 
default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency listed in 
table 2 of this appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the 
speed at which the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this 
appendix) and the motor horsepower determined in section 
III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix. Starting on the compliance date of 
any energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart 
B of this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is 
the minimum of any nominal full load motor efficiency standard from 
the table containing energy conservation standards for submersible 
motors in subpart B of this part, with the number of poles relevant 
to the speed at which the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of 
this appendix) and the motor horsepower determined in accordance 
with section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
    E.1.2.1.2.3. For SVIL pumps, the default nominal full load motor 
efficiency is the minimum full load motor efficiency standard from 
the tables containing the current energy conservation standards for 
polyphase or CSCR/CSIR small electric motors at Sec.  431.446, with 
the number of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being 
tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower 
determined in section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, or for SVIL 
pumps sold with motors less than 0.25 hp, the default nominal full 
load motor efficiency is 58.3% for 6-pole, 64.6% for 4-pole, and 
61.7% for 2-pole motors.
* * * * *

IV. Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors

    A. Scope. This section IV applies only to pumps sold with 
electric motors (excluding pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous 
electric motors regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy 
conservation standards in subpart B of this part), including single-
phase induction motors.
    B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement 
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this 
section IV. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated 
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements 
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable 
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as 
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall 
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and 
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
    C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions 
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section IV. 
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the 
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the 
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in Section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6, shall be met.
    D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point 
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
    D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the 
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of 
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal 
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as 
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the 
operating point of maximum

[[Page 17983]]

pump efficiency on the pump efficiency curve, as determined in 
accordance with Section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-2021, where the pump 
efficiency is the ratio of the pump power output divided by the pump 
power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6-2021, 
disregarding the calculations provided in section 40.6.6.2 of HI 
40.6-2021.
* * * * *

V. Calculation-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors

    A. Scope. This section V can only be used in lieu of the test 
method in section IV of this appendix to calculate the index for 
pumps sold with motors listed in section V.A.1, V.A.2, or V.A.3 of 
this appendix.
    A.1 Pumps sold with motors subject to DOE's energy conservation 
standards for polyphase electric motors at Sec.  431.25(g),
    A.2 SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by 
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec.  431.446 or with SNEMs 
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation 
standards in subpart B of this part but including motors of such 
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp, and
    A.3. Pumps sold with submersible motors.
    A.4. Pumps sold with motors not listed in sections V.A.1, V.A.2, 
or V.A.3 of this appendix cannot use this section V and must apply 
the test method in section IV of this appendix.
    B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement 
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this 
section V. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, 
electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements of 
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable provisions 
of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as referenced in 
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall be determined 
according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and meet the 
requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
    C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions 
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section V. 
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the 
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the 
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021 shall be met.
    D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point 
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
    D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the 
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of 
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal 
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as 
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the 
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency 
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power 
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section 
40.6.6.2.
* * * * *
    E.1.1 Determine the pump power input at 75, 100, and 110 percent 
of the BEP flow rate by employing a least squares regression to 
determine a linear relationship between the pump power input at the 
nominal speed of rotation of the pump and the measured flow rate at 
the following load points: 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of 
the expected BEP flow rate. Use the linear relationship to determine 
the pump power input at the nominal speed of rotation for the load 
points of 75, 100, and 110 percent of the BEP flow rate.
* * * * *
    E.1.2.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than submersible 
motors, determine the represented nominal full load motor efficiency 
as described in section V.E.1.2.1.1.1 of this appendix. For pumps 
sold with submersible motors, determine the default nominal full 
load submersible motor efficiency as described in section 
V.E.1.2.1.1.2 of this appendix.
    E.1.2.1.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than submersible 
motors, the represented nominal full load motor efficiency is that 
of the motor with which the given pump model is being tested, as 
determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure for electric 
motors at Sec.  431.16 or, for SVIL, the DOE test procedure for 
small electric motors at Sec.  431.444, or the DOE test procedure 
for SNEMs in subpart B to this part, as applicable (including for 
motors less than 0.25 hp), and if available, applicable 
representation procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part.
    E.1.2.1.1.2 For pumps sold with submersible motors, prior to the 
compliance date of any energy conservation standards for submersible 
motors in subpart B of this part, the default nominal full load 
submersible motor efficiency is that listed in table 2 of this 
appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the speed at which 
the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and 
the motor horsepower of the pump being tested, or if a test 
procedure for submersible motors is provided in subpart B to this 
part, the represented nominal full load motor efficiency of the 
motor with which the given pump model is being tested, as determined 
in accordance with the applicable test procedure in subpart B to 
this part and applicable representation procedures in 10 CFR part 
429 and this part, may be used instead. Starting on the compliance 
date of any energy conservation standards for submersible motors in 
subpart B of this part, the default nominal full load submersible 
motor efficiency may no longer be used. Instead, the represented 
nominal full load motor efficiency of the motor with which the given 
pump model is being tested, as determined in accordance with the 
applicable test procedure in subpart B of this part and applicable 
representation procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part, must be 
used.
* * * * *

VI. Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors and Controls

    A. Scope. This section VI applies only to pumps sold with 
electric motors, including single-phase induction motors, and 
continuous or non-continuous controls, as well as to pumps sold with 
inverter-only synchronous electric motors that are regulated by 
DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation standards in subpart 
B of this part (with or without controls). For the purposes of this 
section VI, all references to ``driver input power'' in this section 
VI or HI 40.6-2021 refer to the input power to the continuous or 
non-continuous controls.
    B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement 
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this 
section VI. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated 
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements 
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable 
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as 
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall 
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and 
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
    C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions 
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section VI. 
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the 
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the 
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6, shall be met.
    D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point 
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
    D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the 
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of 
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal 
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as 
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
    D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the 
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency 
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power 
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section 
40.6.6.2.
* * * * *

VII. Calculation-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors and Controls

    A. Scope. This section VII can only be used in lieu of the test 
method in section VI of this appendix to calculate the index for 
pumps listed in sections VII.A.1, VII.A.2, VII.A.3, and VII.A.4 of 
this appendix.

[[Page 17984]]

    A.1. Pumps sold with motors regulated by DOE's energy 
conservation standards for polyphase NEMA Design B electric motors 
at Sec.  431.25(g) and continuous controls,
    A.2. Pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors 
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation 
standards in subpart B of this part,
    A.3. SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by 
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec.  431.446 or with SNEMs 
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation 
standards in subpart B of this part (but including motors of such 
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and continuous controls,
    A.4. Pumps sold with submersible motors and continuous controls, 
and
    A.5. Pumps sold with motors not listed in sections VII.A.1, 
VII.A.2, VII.A.3, and VII.A.4 of this appendix and pumps sold 
without continuous controls, including pumps sold with non-
continuous controls, cannot use this section and must apply the test 
method in section VI of this appendix.
    B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement 
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this 
section VII. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated 
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements 
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable 
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as 
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall 
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and 
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
    C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions 
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section VII. 
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the 
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the 
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021 shall be met.
    D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point 
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
    D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the 
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of 
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal 
speed of rotation, as specified in HI 40.6-2021, except section 
40.6.5.3, and appendix B, including the applicable provisions of HI 
9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI 
Engineering Data Book, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-
8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME MFC-22-2007, AWWA 
E103-2015, CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, ISO 
1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 
3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO 
20456:2017, as referenced in HI 40.6-2021.
    D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the 
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency 
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power 
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section 
40.6.6.2.
* * * * *
    E.1.2 * * *
* * * * *
    Lfull = motor losses at full load or, for inverter-
only synchronous electric motors, motor + inverter losses at full 
load, as determined in accordance with section VII.E.1.2.1 of this 
appendix (hp),
* * * * *
    E.1.2.1 Determine the full load motor losses using the 
appropriate motor efficiency value and horsepower as shown in the 
following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.007

Where:

Lfull = motor losses at full load (hp), or for inverter-
only synchronous electric motors, motor + inverter losses at full 
load,
MotorHP = the horsepower of the motor with which the pump model is 
being tested (hp), and
[eta] motor,full = the represented nominal full load 
motor efficiency (i.e., nameplate/DOE-certified value) or the 
represented nominal full load motor + inverter efficiency or the 
default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency as determined 
in accordance with section VII.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix (%).

    E.1.2.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors or submersible motors, determine the 
represented nominal full load motor efficiency as described in 
section VII.E.1.2.1.1.1 of this appendix. For pumps sold with 
inverter-only synchronous electric motors, determine the represented 
nominal full load motor + inverter efficiency as described in 
section VII.E.1.2.1.1.2 of this appendix. For pumps sold with 
submersible motors, determine the default nominal full load 
submersible motor efficiency as described in section VII.E.1.2.1.1.3 
of this appendix.
    E.1.2.1.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors or submersible motors, the represented 
nominal full load motor efficiency is that of the motor with which 
the given pump model is being tested, as determined in accordance 
with the DOE test procedure for electric motors at Sec.  431.16 or, 
for SVIL, the DOE test procedure for small electric motors at Sec.  
431.444 or the DOE test procedure for SNEMs in subpart B of this 
part, as applicable (including for motors less than 0.25 hp), and, 
if available, applicable representation procedures in 10 CFR part 
429 and this part.
    E.1.2.1.1.2 For pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous 
electric motors, the represented nominal full load motor + inverter 
efficiency is that of the motor with which the given pump model is 
being tested, as determined in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure for inverter-only synchronous electric motors in subpart B 
of this part, and, if available, applicable representation 
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part.
    E.1.2.1.1.3 For pumps sold with submersible motors, prior to the 
compliance date of any energy conservation standards for submersible 
motors in subpart B of this part, the default nominal full load 
submersible motor efficiency is that listed in table 2 of this 
appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the speed at which 
the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and 
the motor horsepower of the pump being tested, or if a test 
procedure for submersible motors is provided in subpart B of this 
part, the represented nominal full load motor efficiency of the 
motor with which the given pump model is being tested, as determined 
in accordance with the applicable test procedure in subpart B of 
this part and applicable representation procedures in 10 CFR part 
429 and this part,

[[Page 17985]]

may be used instead. Starting on the compliance date of any energy 
conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart B of this 
part, the default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency may 
no longer be used and instead the represented nominal full load 
motor efficiency of the motor with which the given pump model is 
being tested, as determined in accordance with the applicable test 
procedure in subpart B of this part and applicable representation 
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part, must be used instead.
    E.1.2.2 For load points corresponding to 25, 50, 75, and 100 
percent of the BEP flow rate, determine the part load loss factor at 
each load point as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.008

Where:

z i = the motor and control part load loss factor at load point i,
a,b,c = coefficients listed in either Table 4 of this appendix for 
induction motors or Table 5 of this appendix for inverter-only 
synchronous electric motors, based on the horsepower of the motor 
with which the pump is being tested,
P i = the pump power input to the bare pump at load point 
i, as determined in accordance with section VII.E.1.1 of this 
appendix (hp),
MotorHP = the horsepower of the motor with which the pump is being 
tested (hp),
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.009


          Table 2--Default Nominal Full Load Submersible Motor Efficiency by Motor Horsepower and Pole
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Default nominal full load submersible motor
                                                                                 efficiency
                  Motor horsepower  (hp)                   -----------------------------------------------------
                                                                 2 poles           4 poles           6 poles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.........................................................                55                68                64
1.5.......................................................                66                70                72
2.........................................................                68                70                74
3.........................................................                70              75.5              75.5
5.........................................................                74              75.5              75.5
7.5.......................................................                68                74                72
10........................................................                70                74                72
15........................................................                72              75.5                74
20........................................................                72                77                74
25........................................................                74              78.5                77
30........................................................                77                80              78.5
40........................................................              78.5              81.5              81.5
50........................................................                80              82.5              81.5
60........................................................              81.5                84              82.5
75........................................................              81.5              85.5              82.5
100.......................................................              81.5                84              82.5
125.......................................................                84                84              82.5
150.......................................................                84              85.5              85.5
200.......................................................              85.5              86.5              85.5
250.......................................................              86.5              86.5              85.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[[Page 17986]]



Table 4--Induction Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients for Section VII.E.1.2.2 of This
                                                   Appendix A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Coefficients for induction motor and control
                                                                            part load loss factor  (zi)
                     Motor horsepower  (hp)                      -----------------------------------------------
                                                                         a               b               c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5.............................................................         -0.4658          1.4965          0.5303
>5 and <=20.....................................................         -1.3198          2.9551          0.1052
>20 and <=50....................................................         -1.5122          3.0777          0.1847
>50 and <=100...................................................         -0.6629          2.1452          0.1952
>100............................................................         -0.7583          2.4538          0.2233
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Table 5--Inverter-Only Synchronous Electric Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients for
                                     Section VII.E.1.2.2 of This Appendix A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Coefficients for induction motor and control
                                                                            part load loss factor  (zi)
                     Motor horsepower  (hp)                      -----------------------------------------------
                                                                         a               b               c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5.............................................................         -0.0898          1.0251          0.0667
>5 and <=20.....................................................         -0.1591          1.1683         -0.0085
>20 and <=50....................................................         -0.4071          1.4028          0.0055
>50 and <=100...................................................         -0.3341          1.3377         -0.0023
>100............................................................         -0.0749          1.0864         -0.0096
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-05635 Filed 3-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P