# Proposed Rules

This section ofthe FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public ofthe proposed issuance ofrules and regulations. The purpose ofthese notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making priorto the adoption ofthe final rules.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication ofthe Petition forWaiver ofthe American Water Heater Company's Energy Saver Control From the DOE Water Heater Test Procedure, Denial ofthe Application for an Interim Waiver, and Request for Comments on Testing Water Heater Performance With Electronic Controls (Case No. WH-010)

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

ACTION: Solicitation ofcomments.

SUMMARY: This document publishes a Petition for Waiverto the Department of Energy (DOE orDepartment) water heater test procedure from the American Water Heater Company (American) regarding an adaptive thermostat control. American's Petition for Waiver requests that DOE lower the average tank temperature and base the water draws on equal energy content comparedto the existing test procedure. This document also denies an Interim Waiver to American from the existing DOE waterheatertest procedure. The Department solicits comments, data, and information as to whetherto grant the Petition for Waiver as well as comments on testing water heaters with electronic controls.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information not laterthan February 25, 2002 on American's Petition for Waiver and comments on testing water heaters with electronic controls.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and
statements shall be sent to: Department ofEnergy, Office ofBuilding Research and Standards, Case No. WH-Ol0, Mail Stop EE-41, Room lJ-018, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-9127. We welcome electronic comments but they mustbe followed by

a signed letter. Send email comments to terry.logee@ee.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Terry Logee, U.S. Department ofEnergy, Office ofEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE-41, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington. DC 20585- 0121, (202) 586-1689, email: Terry.Logee@ee.doe.gov or Ms. Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department ofEnergy, Office ofGeneral Counsel, Mail Station GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103, (202) 586- 7432.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products (other than automobiles) was established pursuant to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, (EPCA) which requires DOE to prescribe standardizedtest procedures to measure the energy consumption ofcertain consumer products, including water heaters.

The DOE test procedure. "Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption ofWater Heaters" prescribes a method for characterizing the energy requirements ofall types of
water heaters and yields model-specific energy efficiency information that can aid consumers in their purchasing decisions. The test procedure is set forth in Title 10 CFRpart 430, Subpart B, Appendix E.

The Departmentamended the test procedure rules on September 26, 1980,
to provide for a waiverprocess by adding Section 430.27 to Title 10 CFR part 430.45 FR 64108. The waiver process allows the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) to temporarily waive test procedures for a particularbasic model. On November 26,1986, DOE amended the waiver process to allow the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver for immediate relieffrom test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned DOE for a waiver ofsuch prescribed test procedures. 51 FR 42823. The amendment is codified at 10 CFR 430.27(a)(2).

Any person may submit apetition to waive the requirements ofthe applicable test procedure based on a claim that abasic model contains one or

more design characteristics that prevent 

### 3449

Federal Register

Vol. 67, No. 16
Thursday, January 24, 2002

testing according to the prescribed test procedures, orwhen the prescribed test procedures may evaluate abasic model in a manner so unrepresentative ofits
true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. The Departmentpublishes the Petition for Waiver in the Federal Register and requests comments from interested parties during a 30-day comment period. The Department analyzes the petition, including all comments, and publishes a notice ofeach waiver granted or denied in the Federal Register. Prior to a decision, the Assistant Secretary will consult with the Federal Trade Commissionpursuant to 10 CFR430.27(1). Waivers generally remain in effect until future test procedure amendments become effective; resolving the problem that is the subject ofthe waiver.

Any interested person who has submitted aPetition for Waiver may also file an Application for Interim Waiverto the applicable test procedure requirements. The Application may be filedjointly with, or subsequent to, the filing ofa Petition for Waiver.

Each Application for Interim Waiver
must identify the basic models for which the interim waiver is requested, demonstrate that it meets the criteria in 10 CFR430.27, and be signedby the applicant orby an authorized representative. In addition, each applicant for an Interim Waiver must notify all known manufacturers of domestically marketed units ofthe same product type ofits filing and provide copies ofboththe Application for Interim Waiver and the Petition for Waiver to these manufacturers. These manufacturers may send comments to DOE regarding the Petition for an Interim Waiver. An application for an Interim Waiver does not allow the manufacturer to disregard DOE's test procedure requirements until an Interim Waiver has been granted.

An InterimWaiverwill be granted if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship ifthe Application for Interim Waiver is denied, ifit appears likely thatthe Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/

orthe Assistant Secretary determines that it wouldbe desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for Waiver. 10 CFR 430.27 (g). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a3450 

### Federal 

### Register/Vol. 67, No. 16/Thursday, January 24, 2002/Proposed Rules

period of 180 days or until DOE issues compute the energy factor. The current its determination on the Petition for DOE test procedure requires a constant Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may tank temperature of 135 ofand does not be extended for an additional 180 days, permit a variable thermostat setpoint. ifnecessary. The test procedure does nothave a controller qualification test. DOE's Summary ofPetition current test procedure also requires a

On April 26, 2001, AmericanWater first hour rating testto determine the Heater Company filed an Application amount ofhot waterthat canbe for Interim Waiver and aPetition for withdrawn from a tank ofwater heated Waiver, Case No. WH-010, concerning to 135 of. the tank temperature ofwater heaters American's first proposed change for during testing ofwaterheaters with a qualification test for the "Energy Saver adaptive electronic controls. There was Cycle" would prove that the controller

no confidential material deleted from could automatically adjust the American's petition. However, thermostat setpoint. In its proposal, American submitted test data at DOE's American prescribes a large number of request which was originally marked water draws to allow the tank confidential. Thereafter, on December thermostat to reach a minimum setpoint 13,2001, American withdrew its and then to return to 135 OF. The designation ofconfidentiality for this petition calls this control process an test data (Letter dated December 13, "Energy Saver Cycle" ifthe controller 2001, from Alex Kovalenko, Manager of reaches an equilibrium temperature ProductDevelopment Engineering, lower than 135 OF when the water heater AmericanWater Heater Company to is subjected to the following waterusage Terry Logee, U.S. Department of pattern, herein called draws. Each draw Energy). The test data is in the docket would end when the lower element file. A copy ofAmerican's Petition for energizes, and the subsequent draw Waiver and Application for Interim would commence when the thermostat Waiver is appended to this notice. turns offthe powerto the lower

Whereas the typical electric water element. The test would initially start heatercontrol has a fixed temperature with the tank at 135 OF. The petition thermostat setpoint, American's states thatthe sequence will continue electronic controller can automatically until the mean tanktemperature reaches adjustthe thermostat setpointup or 125°F or less. This test shows thatthe down according to actual household control will lower the set point in
water usage patterns. This automatic response to small water draws. Ifthis thermostat adjustment is called an sequence is continued, the lowest "Energy Saver Cycle." American does "stable" temperature can be determined.
not identify any upper or lower The petition defines the lowest stable thermostat setpoints in its proposal. temperature as the point at which water

American's application seeks the draws of10.7 gallons will not cause the following changes to DOE's test controller to increase the thermostat procedure for a controller with an setpoint. "Energy Saver Cycle": (1) Add a To test whetherthe controllerwill qualification test; (2) Decrease the also automatically raise the temperature, temperature ofthe thermostat to the water draws large enoughto energize lowest stable temperature; (3) Adjust the the upper element must be made until
amount ofwater withdrawn from the

. the controller has returned to the mean tank during the simulated-use test; and tanktemperature of 135 OF. These tests (4) Modify the equations used to demonstrate that the controller adjusts the set point up and down based on actual water usage. Since the "adjusting" process could take approximately 100 cycles for the American control logic, the petition seeks to run this test only once for each model ofcontroller; once the controller has been qualified, any waterheaters using that controller would qualify to

use the "Energy Saver Cycle" test procedure.

American's second proposed change would lowerthe water heater thermostat
setpoint to the lowest stable temperature. This temperature would be obtained through knowledge ofthe temperature adjustment logic for the "Energy Saver Cycle". This lowest stable temperature must be maintained during the six draws of 10.7 gallons or the test is invalid. In this case, the test would need to be repeated at a higher stabletemperature.

American's third proposed change is
to modify the amount ofwater drawn in each ofthe six draws to match the
energy contained in each draw ofthe
current procedure. This accounts for the fact thatthe temperature ofthe water delivered from the waterheater in American's proposal will be lowerthan that delivered in the current DOE test procedure. Each draw is approximately 10.7 gallons ofwater and the energy required to raise 10.7 gallons ofwater from its inlettemperature of58 OFto 135 OF is 6836 BTU. For the Energy Saver Cycle, the draw wouldbe terminated when 6836 BTU have been removed.

American's fourth proposed change is
to modify several calculations in the
current test procedure. The calculations in the current DOE test procedure reference a nominal tanktemperature of 135 OF and a nominal outlet temperature of 135 OF. The petition for waiver seeks
to modify Section 6.1.6, the calculation ofthe adjusted daily water heating energy consumption from:

to:Federal Register/Vol. 57, No. 15/Thursday, January 24, 2002/Proposed Rules 

### 3451

where Tsu is the maximum tank**te~perature** observed afterthe sixth draw ofthe simulated-use test.

The petition seeks to change the calculation ofQhw.77 in Section 6.1.6 from:

to:

_ MiCp,i(Tsu-58° 

## F)
Qhw.77

- L.. 'Y\ i=l 'Ir The last calculation that the petition for waiver seeks to modify is that ofthe
energy factor in Section 6.1.7. The proposed modification would change the equation from:

to:

Discussion ofAmerican's Petitionfor Waiver

The Department's waiver regulations provide that the applicant for Interim Waiver is required to notify in writing all known manufacturers of domestically marketedunits ofthe same product type that it has filed an Application for Interim Waiver and a Petition for Waiver and provide copies ofthese documents to the manufacturers. The regulations also provide that the Assistant Secretary will receive and considertimely written
comments on the Application for Interim Waiver. 10 CFR430.27(c)(2).

The Departmentreceived comments from Rheem and Applied Energy Technology (AET), Rheem has indicated DOE should recognize new control technologies for water heaters and should pursue changes to credit resulting energy savings. Rheem is concerned, however, that American's proposedmethod is designed specifically for one type ofcontrol system and disqualifies or discounts other well-known alternative control schemes.

Rheem expressed a concern thatthe proposed procedure assumes the bestcase scenario for the test condition. Rheem indicates that potential savings would only be realized ifthe "Energy Saver Cycle" were selected and ifa homeowner's wateruse patterns resulted in a water heater setpoint temperature below 135 OF. Rheem is concernedthe proposed procedure would lead to manufacturers claiming
water heater efficiencies not representative ofthose achieved in practice.

Rheem also believes that the first hour rating would need to be adjusted ifthe tanktemperature is lowered. Rheem states thatthe revised tank temperature, Le., the lowest stable temperature, should be used for the first-hour rating
test.

AET commented that a comprehensive reexamination ofthe DOE water heatertest procedure is needed to allow properrepresentation ofin-field efficiency improvements made possible by a variety ofcontrol approaches. While AET indicates that the proposed testmethod is an improvement overthe currenttest procedure, AET claims that the proposed test method excludes other forms ofcontrols that couldbe applied to water heaters and therefore would provide a competitive advantage to American.

AET is concerned thatbecause a lowest stable temperature is not specified in the proposedtest procedure, the delivered water temperature could consequently be extremely low, AET also commented that the proposedtest procedure's absence ofa lower and upper setpoint temperature couldbe abused. A manufacturer coulduse a large on-off temperature differential on the upper thermostat so thatthe upperheating element would not energize. This could allow a lowest stable temperature of about 59 OF, resulting in nearly 100 percent efficiency.

AET's final point echoes the concern ofRheemthat the proposedtest procedure would yield abest-case scenario and would not necessarily reflectthe energy use patterns that are typical ofconsumers. AET claims that the proposed testprocedure does not

use long draws, like those seen in actual

use that would force the controllerto reach a stable temperature different from the lowest stable temperature.

Inresponse to these comments, the Department notes that a waiver is issued for specific basic models and that American has identified those models it is seeking to waive in its petition for waiver. Otherbasic models or other control schemes would have a different waiver and test procedure. The
comments by Rheem and AET on the general test procedure are ofuse because they have identified issues related to the methodology ofhow to arrive at atesttemperature representative ofactual consumeruse and how to measure the first hour rating. These issues would need to be discussed andresolvedbefore a waiver couldbe issued regarding testing of
water heaters with electronic controls.

Discussion ofAmerican's Application for InterimWaiver

Pursuantto the requirements in 10 CFR 430,27(g), an Interim Waiverwill be granted ifthe applicant can show that itwill experience economic hardship ifthe application for Interim Waiver is denied, ifthe petition for waiver will likely be granted and/or if the Assistant Secretary determines for public policy reasons to grant immediatereliefpending a determination on the petition for waiver. DOE will address each ofthese criteria separately as applied to American's petition for an interim waiver.

First, DOE does notbelieve American has provided information in its application for the interim waiver to support its claim ofeconomic hardship'. In its application, American merely stated, "From an economic point of view, American Water Heater Company has invested significantly in the development ofthis product and to not be able to present one ofits bestfeatures would cause loss ofsales and discourage further development." (Letter dated April 26, 2001 from Timothy

### J. Schellenberger, SeniorVice President-Product Engineering, to the Assistant Secretary, Application for Interim Waiver). American's mere assertion ofeconomic hardship does not establishthat it will experience such hardship, American did not provide any factual information tojustify its assertion.

Second, atthis time, the Assistant Secretary does nothave adequate information from American to determine thatAmerican's Petition for Waiver from the DOE testprocedure will likely be granted. The petition is incomplete for the following reasons:

American's proposed test protocol depends on establishing a lowest stable temperature for their thermostat controller. The procedure outlined in the petition uses a 100 draw-cycle to qualify the controller as having an & Idquo;Energy SaverCycle". However, this procedure only establishes that the controllerwill lower andraise the thermostat setpoint. American did not provide any test data thatDOE could

use to determine that a lowerthermostat setpointwouldresult from typical household use and whatthat lower thermostat setpoint mightbe. Forthe petition for waiver to be complete, it
must containthe test temperature for eachbasic model for which a waiver is requested. From the confidential test

### 3452 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 16/Thursday, January 24, 2002/Proposed Rules

data that was provided, DOE can only determine that the controller can automatically reduce orraise the thermostat setpoint.

DOE believes that American must provide data from field tests ofwater heaters using this controllerto determine an average lowest stable temperature for the U.S. for each basic model for which a waiver is requested. There are probably a number of variables that shouldbe considered so thatthe resultant lowest stable temperature is representative of

## u.s. households including tankvolumes, various inlet watertemperatures and varying family sizes. The appropriate
testtime and the allowed variability to demonstrate a "stable" temperature would have to be determined. Furthermore, the field tests should contain a sample large enough to be statistically relevant at high confidence. The Departmentwould like to receive comments on the concerns listed above.

DOErecognizes that developing the necessary data to quantify the lowest stable temperature for each basic model could be a time consuming and costly task. Since this petition for waiver from the DOE test procedure for an automatic thermostat controller is the first DOE has received for this type ofdevice, we
are very interested in receiving
comments that would help develop a general test method for automatic thermostat controllers. Forinstance, is it practical to develop a computer model that couldbe used to qualify any automatic controller? Is it possible to

use existing databases such as the Energy Information Administration's Residential Energy Consumption Survey for housing andfamily characteristics combined with average inlet water temperature data from ground water temperatures to develop an algorithm that would yield areasonable lowest stable temperature? Are there other ways to simplify and generalize the test procedure for an automatic thermostat controller?

Second, American's petition for waiver does not address the first hour rating ofthe waterheater. This test result is used by retailers and installers

as an indication ofwhat size water heaterto install in a given home. The FTC also uses this value to determine which group ofwaterheaters a given model belongs in for establishing the range ofenergy factors and yearly costs ofoperation. In the currentDOE test procedure, the first hour rating test starts at a maximum temperature of 135 oaF ±5 of and continues until the average tanktemperature has dropped 25 of. Ifthe water is reheated within the hour, the draw is initiated again and the water withdrawn is summed. American's proposed modification to the current 24-hour simulated-use test did not provide a first hour rating test which is a necessary component ofthe
waterheater test procedure. DOE believes itwouldbe logical for the first hourrating test to be conducted atthe

same tank temperature as the test for determining the energy factor. However, ifthat temperature is much lower than the current 135 of±5 of, the final water temperature couldbe too cool to be considered useful.

Finally, the Department has determined that there are no public policy impacts that warrantgranting immediate reliefpending a determination on the Petition for Waiver.
Conclusions

Following a careful consideration of all material that was submitted by American and based on the criteria for granting an interim waiver as provided in 10 CFR 430.27(g), and for the reasons stated above, the Departmenthas concludedthat American's Application for an Interim Waiver shouldbe denied.

At the same time, the Department solicits comments, data, and information as to whetherto grant the Petition for Waiver, as well as comments ontesting water heaters with electronic controls. Such comments will assist the Department in determining whether it can develop a practical test procedure for these devices.

Issued in Washington, DC, onJanuary 17, 2002. David K. Garman, AssistantSecretary, EnergyEfficiencyand RenewableEnergy. April 26, 2001 Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy United States Department ofEnergy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585 To Whom It May Concern: Subject: Petition for Waiver Specific Requirements to be Waived.

American Water Heater Company seeks awaiver in the application ofthe "Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption ofWater Heaters" contained in 10 CFRPart 430 Subpart B Appendix E as applied to electric water heater models thathave adaptive electronic controls.

Utilizing a microprocessor-based control on an electric water heater allows a level ofintelligence to be added to the control logic that is not possible with the conventional electromechanical control systems used today. One use ofthis intelligence is to have the control adjust the stored water temperature based onthe actual hot
waterusage pattern to determine the lowestpossible temperature to store water thatwill meetthe needs ofthe

consumer. The result ofthis new control logic is a reduction in energy consumption. Such a control cycle will be identified as an "Energy Saver Cycle".

American Water Heaterplans to commercialize a microprocessor-based control system with an Energy Saver Cycle. However, we are unable to characterize and market the true efficiency benefitto the consumer through the "Uniform TestMethod for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Water Heaters" ratings process. The test procedure does not allow the efficiency benefit ofan Energy Saver Cycle to be demonstrated. These types ofintelligent electronic controls are more expensive and without the ability to demonstrate the benefits in terms ofenergy savings, it is difficulttojustify the additional
cost to the consumer. We are specifically petitioning to allow the use ofan alternate test procedure described below to rate and label the efficiency of

a water heater when using the "Energy Saver Cycle".

Basic Models and all Manufacturers (See attached list) Design Characteristics Background Information

The predominate energy loss ofatank type electric waterheater is the standby loss associated with storing the hot
water. There are two methods of reducing these losses; one can increase the effectiveness ofthe insulation system, orreduce the stored water temperature. The "Energy Saver Cycle"

saves energy by reducing the stored
watertemperature.

The study report "Baseline Results and Methodology ofthe Consumer Subgroup Analysis for Residential Water Efficiency Standards", submittedto the Department ofEnergy October 1998, shows thatthe average set point temperature ofresidential waterheaters varies widely across the United States. The northern states tend to be hotter with average set points as high as 142 OF andthe south as low as 123 OF. This corresponds inversely with the average inlet watertemperature in the same
areas. Atthe time ofuse, the hotwater is blendedwith cold waterto produce the desired use temperature. This process ofblending causes the usage quantity ofhot water to change inversely with the stored water temperature. For example: A shower

### Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 16/Thursday, January 24, 2002/Proposed Rules 3453

lasting 10 minutes with a delivered
watertemperature of105 of and a flow
rate of2.5 gallons/minute uses 25 gallons ofwater. If 135 ofhotwater, suppliedby awater heater, is blended with cold water at 58 of, the shower will consume 9.74 gallons ofcold water and 15.26 gallons ofhot water. In contrast, ifthe hot water supply temperature were reduced to 115 ofthe usage proportions would change to 4.39 gallons ofcold water and 20.61 gallons ofhot water. The energy consumed and the quantity ofwater used in the shower is the same in both cases but the proportion ofheated water goes up. The important difference is that, in the time between showers, the energy consumed
to maintain the stored water temperature goes down by 29.85% when the water is stored at 115 of

versus 135 of. The person taking the shower didn't know the difference exceptthey had to use more hotwater to getthe desired temperature. As the stored watertemperature is further lowered, eventually the water heater will notbe able to supply the needed
amount ofblendedhot water and the
watertemperature will have to be increased.

The adaptive control logic continually adjusts stored water temperature within specified limits to getto the temperature where the maximum demand event can be metby the quantity and temperature ofwater stored in the heater. This "Energy Saver Cycle" will produce real energy savings in a significant number ofhouseholds and thus deserves to have

a testprocedure designed to allow the efficiency benefits to be demonstrated. The currenttest procedure doesn't allow this because the mean tanktest temperature is fixed at 135 of. Energy SaverCycle Qualificationtest

It is simple for a manufacturer to put

an electronic control on awater heater and label a cycle as an "Energy Saver Cycle" without having an adaptive control that will adjust stored water temperature based on usage. Some examples ofother controls that would
not qualify for this modified test procedure couldbe, a conventional control with a fixed but lower set point which is identified as an "Energy Saver Cycle" or an offpeaktype control that simply adjusts the set pointbased on the time ofthe day. This new test is required to prove that the control meets the "Energy Saver Cycle" criteria as a qualifier to use the energy saver test modifications. The object ofthe Page 3
test is to confirm that the control does adapt the stored water temperature based on waterusage. The following simple test would be used to prove that the control adapts
water temperature to water usage.

1. The unit is setup per the "Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption ofWater Heaters", 10 CFR 430.23.

2. The unit is run on normal cycle and the thermostat is adjusted until the

mean tank temperature is 135 OF. Then the control is switched to the "Energy Saver Cycle" and a series ofsmall draws

are made. Each draw should be sufficientto cause the lower element to

come on. The lower elementwill reheat the water until it shuts offat which time another draw will start. This sequence will continue until the mean tank temperature, at the element shutoff point, is 125 OF or less. The mean tank temperature after the first cycle should be 135 OF and the last cycle will be 125 OF or less to show thatthe control will lowerthe set point inresponse to a low
water usage situation.

3. Then the draw size will be changed
to be large enough thatthe control will adjustthe temperature up. After each reheat the draw will be repeated until the control has adjusted the setpoint up enough to return the mean tank temperature back to the 135 OF point. At this point, the test would have proven that the control adjusts set pointup and down based on actual water usage. Ifthe control can not demonstrate the adaptive ability to adjust stored water temperature based on actual usage, it will not qualify to use the proposed modified procedure.

4. This test is somewhat cumbersome in that a large number ofdraw reheat cycles wouldbe required to complete the test. In our case, itwould require approximately 100 cycles. The test couldbe automated and allowedto run

over nightto speed up the qualification process. The test should only have to be

run once for agiven manufacturer's control. Once the control has been qualified, any units using that control would qualify for the Energy Saver Cycle test sequence.
TestProcedure Changes

Staying with the principal that the delivered hotwater energy doesn't change as the stored water temperature changes, the following changes are required to allow the energy savings of

an "Energy Saver Cycle" to be demonstrated and evaluated.

1. The size ofthe six water draws will be adjusted suchthatthe BTUs of delivered hot water (BTUs to heatthe
water from 58F to delivery temperature) is equal to BTUs for the six 10.7 gallon draws heated from 58F to 135F. This calculation = (Gallons x Lbs.lgal. x Specific Heat x (deliveredtemp.

- 58F)

= (6851 BTU for 10. 7 gal. heated from 58Fto 135F). Since the delivered water temperature is not a constant during a draw, this calculation couldbe accomplished by using "Simpson's Rule" method or another suitable numerical methodto integrate the delivered water temperature-volume function. The water draw is started and the total is calculated every 5 seconds until the 6851 BTU ofdelivered hot
water energy is reached. The actual volume ofeach draw will vary inversely

as the delivered watertemperature varies. The Energy SaverCycle typically draws about 90 tol00 gallons versus the 64.2 gallons ofthe current test procedure. The hot water energy delivered inboth cases is the same.

One approach to running this modifiedtest on a heater with an "Energy Saver Cycle" wouldbe to set up the heater as "normal" with the thermostat set to give a mean tank temperature of135 OF. Thenrun the test draw sequence repeatedly until the temperature adjustment logic ofthe control lowers the temperature to the lowest stable temperature. At that point,

a full 24 hour efficiency test wouldbe conducted to determine the efficiency of the heaterusing Energy Saver Cycle. This wouldrequire over 100 draw and reheat cycles using our control algorithm. This approach is impractical. The practical approach is to run the control in normal mode and adjustthe water temperature to the lowest stable temperature that the "Energy Saver Cycle" wouldreach ifthe above approach were used.

2. 

### Definition of loweststable temperature: This is the lowestwater temperature set point such that when the six draw sequence in step 1 is performed, the control will not adjust the set pointhigher. In our control logic, the set point is increased ifthe cold
water rises far enough in the tankto

cause the upper elementto come on. Thus for our control logic, the lowest temperature where the draw sequence in step 1 doesn't cause the upper element to come on is our "lowest stable temperature". Other control logic could result in another "lowest stable temperature" point. To determine this temperature, the tester would need to know the temperature adjustment logic for the Energy Saver Cycle. He would set the test watertemperature to the lowest stable temperature based on that logic. He then would observe the draw quantities and temperatures during the efficiency test to see that a temperature adjustment condition was not present. If

atemperature adjustmentwould have been made the test is invalid and the

### 3454 

### Federal Register/Vol. 67, 

### No. 16/

### Thursday, January 24, 2002/Proposed Rules

test would need to be repeated at a highertemperature.

3. Inthe current procedure, the mean tanktemperature is to be adjusted to 135F. 

### There are three places in the calculation ofefficiency where the raw data is adjusted back to 135F

### to correct for variation between actual and ideal test conditions. Since the Energy Saver Cycle test doesn't run at 135F

### mean tank temperature, this correction needs to be changed to reflectthe new test conditions. This means that the hard coded 135 

### values inthe calculations
must be changed to a variable so the actual value canreflect the currenttest conditions. The most appropriate variable is "Tsu" which is the maximum mean tanktemperature observed after the sixth draw. Inthe
current procedure, Tsu mustbe 135F 

### ± 5F 

### and is the logical equivalent ofthe 135F 

### ofthe current procedure. Thus the calculation ofQda is changed from

Qda = 

### Qd- «Tstby,2

- Ta,stby,2)-(135-67.5» 

### VA tstby,2 to Qda = 

### Qd- «Tstby,2

- Ta,stby,2)-(Tsu- 67.5» 

### VA tstby,2 and QHW,77 is change from

QHW,77

# = ± Mi Cpi (l35F-58F) to QHW,77

# =± Mi Cpi (Tsu-58F)

1=1 

### Nr ;=1 

### Nr

Ef' h d fi 

### Ef Mi Cpi (Tsu

- 58F) Ef Mi Cpi(Tsu

- 58F) IS C 

### ange rom 

### =£... 

### to 

### = £...

.**I~!** 

### Qdm I=! 

### Qdm

Conclusion



### New technologies can foster changes that obsolete current practices. American Water Heater's adaptive control has created an energy saving control methodthat was not anticipated

or coveredby the current DOEtest procedure. This waiver will allow the efficiencybenefits ofthis improved control method to be demonstrated while the test procedures are modified to keep up with technology. This change in control method will reduce water heaterenergy consumption, andthus its adoptionby the industry should be encouraged. This can bestbe done by granting this waiver and modifying the
test procedure. Confidential test data, which demonstrates the energy efficiency benefit, canbe made available upon yourrequest. Respectfully submitted, Timothy J. Shellenberger, Sr. Vice President-ProductEngineering. April 26. 2001 Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy United States Department ofEnergy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585

To Whom ItMay Concern: Subject: Application for InterimWaiver. American Water HeaterCompany seeks a waiver in the application ofthe "Uniform TestMethod for Measuring the Energy Consumption ofWaterHeaters" contained in 10 CFRPart 430 Subpart B Appendix E as applied to electric water heatermodels that have adaptive electronic controls. We are seeking this interim waiver to allow the initial marketing ofour new product to claim the benefits ofthe "Energy Saving Cycle" as described in the petition for waiver.

We feel that the interim waiver shouldbe granted becauseit is likely that the petition for waiver will be granted. The new technology addressed by the petition for waiveryields a legitimate energy savings and improvement in the energy efficiency level of this category ofappliance. This improvement

serves the interest and goal ofthe Department ofEnergy and thus should be supported. Allowing the waiverwill encourage other manufacturers to produce similar products creating a.general improvement in energy conservation. As new technology is developed, test procedures need to be modified to accommodate the improvement and allow the benefits to be shown to the

consumer. These are all good arguments as to why the waiver should be granted and thus the interim waiverbe granted.

From an economic point ofview, American Water HeaterCompany has invested significantly in the development ofthis product and to not be able to present one of its best features would cause loss ofsales and discourage further development. Respectfully submitted,



### DOE WAIVER MODEL COMPARISON Timothy Shellenberger, Sr. Vice President-Product Engineering. TJS/meh

I, the undersigned, on behalfofAmerican Water HeaterCompany, hereby certify that a copy ofthe foregoing Petition for Waiver and Petition for InterimWaiver, has been sent to each ofthe following known manufacturers ofdomestically marketedunits ofthe same product type (as listed in Section 322(a) of the Act), as follows:

. Rheem Water Heater Division, Rheem Manufacturing Company, 2600 GunterPark Drive East, Montgomery, AL 36109-1413, Attention: ScottD. Martin A.O. SmithWaterProducts Company,

Rochelle Park, Suite 200, 600 E. John CarpenterFreeway, Irving, TX 75062-3990, Attention: Ronald Massa Bradford White Corporation, 200 Lafayette

Street, Middleville, MI 49333-9492, Attention: Eric M. Lannes State Industries, 500 Lindahl Parkway,

Ashland City, TN 37015-1234, Attention: John R. Lindahl, Jr. Lochinvar Corporation, 2005 Elm Hill Pike,

Nashville, TN 37210-3807, Attention: Mr. William 1. Vallett, Jr. I further hereby certify that the Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy will receive and consider timely written comments on the Application for Interim Waiver.

This the 26th day ofApril 2001. Timothy J. Shellenberger.

AWHC wholesale mod- AWHC retail mod- AWHC wholesale AWHC retail mod- RHEEM (Rich- Stale Industries els electronic els electronic models standard als standard mond. Rudd. GE) A.O. Smith Bradford White (Reliance. Lochinvar Maylag. Sears)
EE92-40H'"O''' EE2H40HO······ E92-40W"O'" E2H40HD

.....•

.. 81XH400 PEST-40 M+40T100S PS-40-20RT STA040KK-3 MOH40-2 M-II-40T100S 9-40-2KRT 82R40-2 HE20-40T EXR40-2 SSX-40-2LRT 32746

### Federal 

### Register/Vol. 67, No. 16/Thursday, January 24, 2002/Proposed Rules

DOE WAIVER MODEL COMPARISON-Continued 3455

AWHC wholesale mod- AWHC relail mod- AWHC wholesale AWHC relail mod- RHEEM (Rich- Slale Industries A.D.Smilh Bradford While (Reliance, Lochinvar els electronic els electronic models standard els standard mond, Rudd, GE) Maylag, Sears)

EE122-40W"D'" EE2J40HD······ E122-40W"D'" E2J40HD

...... 81XH40D PEST-40 M-I-40T10DS PX-40-20RT STA040KK-3 MEH40-2 M-II-40T10DS 9-40-2KRT HE29-40T SSX-40-2LRT 32746 12-40-2ART EE122-40W"D'" EE3H40HD

...... E93-40W"D'" E3H40HD

...... MR40245 PEHT-40 M-III-40T10DS 32049 MP40245 LT-40-2LRT EE93-40H"'D'" EE3J40HD

...... E123-40H"'D'" EJ40HD

...... MR40245 PDHT-40 M-III-40T10DS 32049 MP40245 LT-40-2LRT EE92-40R'"D''' EE2H40RD

...... EE92-40R"'D'" E2H40RD

...... RMEMKR 40-2 PES-40 M-III-40S10DS SSX-40-2LRS 9-40-2KRS EE122-40R"'D'" EE2J40RD

...... E122-40R"'D'" E2J40RD

...... RMEMKR 40-2 PES-40 M-II-40S10DS SSX-40-2LRS PE40M9A 9-40-SK4S 12-40-2ARS EE93-40R'"D''' EE3H40RD

...... E93-40R'"D''' E3H40RD'''W'' RMEMXR 40- PEC-40 HE21240S LT 2TI 40-2LRS SE40M12A EE123-40R'"D'" EE3J40RD

...... E123-40R"'D'" E3J40RD·

....• RMEMXR 40- PEC-40 HE21240S LT 2TI 40-2LRS SE40M12A EE92-50H'"D''' EE2H50HD

..•

..• E92-50W"D'" E2H50HD

...... 81X52 D PEST-52 M-II-50T10DS PX-52-20RT STA052KK-3 ME52-2 9-52-2KRT RMEKR 50-2 HE29 SOT PE50T9A 32756 82XR52-2 SSX-52-2LRT EXR52-2 EE122-50W"D'" EE2J50HD

...... E122-50W"D'" E2J50HD

...... RMEXR 50- M-II-50T10DS 12-52-ART 2TI 32059 SE50T12A EE93-50H"'D'" EE3H50HD

...... E93-50H"'DC'" E3H50HD'"C''' MR50245 PEH-52 M-III-50T10DS HE21250T MP50245 LT-52-2LRT 32151 EE123-50W"D'" EE3J50HD

...... E123- E3J50HD'"C''' MR50245 PEH-52 M-III-50T10DS HE21250T 50Hwu DC··· MP50245 LT-52-2LRT 32151 EE92-50R'"D''' EE2H50RD

...... E92-50R'"D''' E2H50RD·

..•

.. RMEMKR 50-2 PES-52 M-II-50S10DS PX-52-20RS PE50M9A SSX-52-2LRS 82 MXR52-2 9-52-2KRS EMXR52-2 HE2950S EE122-50R"'D'" EE2J50RD

...... E122-50R"'D'" E2J50RD

...... RMEMXR 50- PEC-52 12-52-2ARS 2TI HE21250S SE50M12A EE93-50R'"D''' EE3H50RO

...... E93-50R'"OC''' E3H50RO'"C''' LT-52-2LRS EE123-50R"'D'" EE3J50RO

...... E123- E3J50RO'"C''' 50R"'OC'" EEZ3-50R'"O''' EE3Z50RO

...... EZ3- E3Z50RO"'C'" MSR50245 SOR**"'DC*** EE92-65W"O'" EE2H65HO

...... E92-65H"'O'" E2H65HD

...... 81X660 PEC-66 M-II-65R100S HE2966T STA066KK-3 ME66-2 32766 RMEKR65-2 SSX-66-2LRT 82XR66-2 EXR66-2 PE65T9A E122-65H"'D'" EE2J65HO

...... E122-65H"'O'" E2J65HO

...... 12-66-2ART EE93-65W"D'" EE3H65HO

...... E93-65H'"OC''' E3H65HO'"C''' E123-65H'"O''' EE3J65HO

...... E123- E3J65HO'"C''' RMEXR 65- PEH-66 M-III-65R100S 32069 65W"OC'" 2TI EE92-80H'"O''' EE2H80HO

...... E92-80W"O'" E2H80HO

...... RMEKR80-2 PES-80 32786 STA082KK-3 82XR80-2 SSX-82-2LRT EXR80-2 EE122-80H"'O'" EE2J80HO

...... E122-80H"'D'" E2J80HD·

....• PEC-80 12-82-2ART EE93-80W"O'" EE3H80HO

...... E93-80H"'OC'" E3H80HO"'C'" EE123-80W"D'" EE3J80HO

...... E123- E3J80HO'"C''' RMEXR 80- PEH-80 M-III-80R10DS HE21282T 80H"'OC'" 2TI 32089 LT SE80T12A 82-2LRT MR85245 MP85245

[FR Doc, 02-1747 Filed 1-23-02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P