CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

Monday 

September 26, 1988 

Part III 

Department of 

Energy 

Office of Conservation and Renewable 

Energy 

10 CFR Part 430 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products; Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and Public Hearing Regarding 

Test Procedures for Refrigerators, 

Refrigerator-Freezers and Freezers 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

37416 Federal Register / Vol. 53, No. 186 /Monday, September 26. 1988 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office 01 Conservation and 

Renewable Energy 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. CA5-RM-So-118] 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products; Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaklng and Public 

Hearing Regarding Test Procedures 

for Refrigerators, RefrlgeratorFreezers and Freezers 

AGENCV: Office of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making 

and public hearing. 

SUMMARV: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) hereby proposes to amend the 

test procedures for refrigerators. 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. Test 

procedures are one part of the energy 

conservation program for consumer 

products established pursuant to the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as 

amended by the National Energy 

Conservation Policy Act (NECPA). the 

National Appliance Energy 

Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA) 

(Pub. L.l00-12) and the National 

Appliance Energy Conservation 

Amendments of 1988 (NAECA 1988) 

(Pub. L. 100-357). Among other program 

elements, the legislation requires that 

standard methods of testing be 

prescribed for covered products. 

The purpose of today's notice is to 

prescribe test procedures for rating 

refrigerators. refrigerator-freezers and 

freezers with innovative features. such 

as variable defrost controls (VDC). dual 

compressor systems. and the qliick 

freeze operation of freezers. 

DATES: Written comments (seven 

copies) in response to this notice mllst 

be received November 25, 1988; requests 

to speak at the public hearing must be 

received by November 1: the public 

hearing will be held on November 7. 

1988, at 9:30 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

requests to speak at the public hearing, 

and copies of statements of each 

speaker are to be submitted to: U.S. 

Department of Energy. Office of 

Conservation and Renewable Energy. 

Office of H~arings and Dockets, 

Refrigerator. Refrigerator-Freezer, and 

Freezer Test Procedures, Docket No. 

CAS-RlI.·f-SO-118.1ooo Independence 

Avenue. SW., Washington. DC 20585. 

(202) 586-9320. 

The public hearing will be held at 

Room 1E-245. Forrestal Building. 1000 

Independence Avenue. SW .• 

Washington, DC 20585. Please bring nine 

copies of the oral testimony to Hearing. 

Copies of the transcript of the public 

hearing, and the public comments 

received. may be obtained at the DOE 

Freedom of Information Reading Room, 

Room lE-190, 1000 Independence 

Avenue. SW., Washington DC 20585, 

(202) 586-5969. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Douglass S. Abramson. U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of Conservation and 

Renewable Energy, Forrestal Building, 

Mail Station, CE-132,looo 

Independence Avenue, SW .• 

. Washington, DC 20585. (202] 586-9127. 

Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of General Counsel, 

Forrestal Building. Mail Station, GC12, 1000 Independence Avenue. SW .• 

Washington, DC 20585. (202) 586-9507. 

U.S. Department ofF..nergy, Hearings 

and Dockets, Forrestal Building, Mail 

Station CE-43.1. Room 68-025, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. (202) 586-9320. 

I. Supplementary Information: 

a. Background 

The Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products was established 

pursuant to Title III, Part B of the Energy 

Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) 

(Pub. L. 94-163). Subsequently, EPCA 

was amended by the National Energy 

Conservation Policy Act (NECPA) (Pub. 

L. 95-619), the National Appliance 

Energy Conservation Act of 1987 

(NAECA) (Pub. L.l00-12) 1 and the 

National Appliance Energy 

Conservation Amendments of 1988 

(NAECA-1988) (Pub. L. l00-357). Among 

other program elements, section 323 of 

the Act requires that standard methods 

of testing be prescribed for covered 

products, including refrigerators. 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. 

The Department of Energy (DOE or 

the Department) proposed test 

procedures for refrigerators and 

refrigerator-freezers. and freezers by 

notice issued April 21. 1977. (42 FR 

21576. April 27, 1977). A public hearing 

on the proposed test procedures was 

held on June 14.1977. The Department 

issued fmal test procedures Ou 

September 8. 1977. (42 FR 46140, 

September 14, 1977). 

On July 14, 1980, DOE published a 

response to a petition for rulemaking 

submitted by the Association of Home 

Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM). 

requesting that the burden oftest 

I Pari l3 of Ti tie III of EPCA as amended by 

NECPA. NAECA and NAECA-l988 is referred to in 

this notice as the " Act". 

procedures for refrigerators. refrigeratorfreezers, andJreezers be lessened. 

The response included the comments 

of the National Bureau of Standards 

(NBS), the AHAM recommendations. 

and DOE's proposed revised test 

procedures. (45 FR 47396, July 14, 1980). 

On October 14, 1981, DOE proposed an 

amended version of the revised test 

procedures (46 FR 50544) which defined 

steady-state conditions and 

requirements for the test chamber 

ambient air temperature gradient. The 

final rule establishing new test 

procedures for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers and freezers, was published on 

August 10. 1982. (47 FR 34517). Editorial 

corrections to the final rule were . 

published March 29. 1983. (48 FR 13013). 

The August 1982 final rule established a three-year transition period, expiring on 

September 9, 1985. for the new test 

procedures. Subsequently, DOE received 

. four petitions for waivers concerning 

electronic adaptive defrost controls 

(ADC). The first petition (Case No. RF001), received from W'nirlpool 

Corporation (Whirlpool) on November 

14,1984. was published in the Federal 

Register on January 11. 1985. (50 FR 

1628). Based on DOE's review of 

comments. and data provided, DOE 

determined that the test procedures had no provision for determining the interval 

between defrost cycles for ADCequipped refrigerator-freezers which 

would be comparable to normal usage 

patterns. Based on DOE's review of 

Whirlpoors field data and comments 

from two other manufacturers, DOE 

developed an alternative test method 

which was included in the Decision and 

Order granted Whirlpool on August 23, 

1985. (50 FR 34186). 

The second Petition for Waiver (Case 

No. RF-002) received from White 

Consolidated Industries (WCI) on 

October 23. 1985, was published in the 

Federal Register on December 16, 1985. 

(50 FR 51284). WCI also had developed 

an electronic defrost control system 

(EDC) and requested permission to use the test procedures granted previously 

to Whirlpool. Based on DOE's review of 

comments and the Petition for Waiver. 

DOE developed an alternate test met."lod 

based on the long-time automatic 

defrost test in Appendix Al of Subpart }j 

of 10 CFR Part 430, which was included 

in the Decision and Order granted WCI. 

(51 FR 15679. April 26, 1986). 

On March 12, 1986, Whirlpool 

submitted Petitions for Waiver of DOE 

test procedure requirements for two new ADC-equipped refrigerator-freezers 

(Case Nos. RF-003 and RF-004). Both 

petitions were published in the Federal 

Register on May 21. 1986. (51 FR 18655). 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

Federal Register I Vol. 53. No. 186 I Monday, September 26, 1988 I Proposed Rules 37417 

In each petition, -Whirlpool requested to use the alternate test procedure grantedin Case No. RF-OOl. Based upon DOE's 

review of the petitions and the 

comments received. the Department 

granted each petition. allowing 

Whirlpool to use the same test 

procedure specified in the DOE's 

Decision and Order in Case No. RJi-OOl. 

(51 FR 36591, October 14, 1986). 

Following an analysis of the two 

defrost control systems and a review of 

past comments and data, DOE is 

proposing a test procedure for variable 

defrost control (VDC) equipped 

refrigerator-freezers and freezers based on the long-time automatic defrost test 

in Appendices Al and B1 to Subpart B 

to eliminate the need for the outstanding 

waivers. 

DOE is also proposing to establish 

test procedures for refrigerator-freezers 

with dual compressor systems and 

procedures for freezers with a rapid 

freezing feature. 

II. Discussion: 

This proposed rulemaking presents 

the various developments in the 

manufacture of refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers. and freezers which 

have occurred since the August 10.1982, 

final rule. 

a. Variabie Defrost Control 

Four petitions for waivers have-been 

granted for refrigerator-freezers 

equipped with a variable defrost control 

system. Three were given to the 

Whirlpool Corporation and one to White 

Consolidated Industries. Variable 

defrost control systems are identified 

differently by each manufacturer, for 

example, as an adaptive defrost control 

system (ADC) by Whirlpool, and as an 

electronic defrost control (EDC) by WCI. 

DOE is proposing that the term _ 

"variable defrost control" (VDC) include 

these two defrost systems as well as 

any future products which have 

electronic or mechanical devices which 

can change the interval between 

defrosts by evaluating the operating 

characteristics and the compressor run time of the product, including demand 

defrost. 

The defrost mechanism on a typical 

automatic defrost refrigerator-freezer is 

operated by a timer which counts 

compressor on-time. The defrost cycle 

begins after a set compressor on-time. 

typically 12 hours. The VDC system 

relies on various inputs, in addition to 

compressor on time to determine the 

time between defrost cycles. These 

inputs could be the number of door 

openings for refrigerator or freezer 

compartments, air flow rate across coils. 

defrost time for previous defrost, outside 

temperature. etc. Since each 

manufacturer is likely to take a unique 

approach to these characteristics, DOE 

today is proposing a method of testing 

that can be used by all manufacturers 

for rating those refrigerator-freezers and 

freezers with a variable defrost system. 

The petitions for waivers identified 

three problem areas in the existing test 

procedure. The first is the inability of 

the current test procedure to determine 

the interval between defrost cycles for 

VDC equipment that would be 

comparable to normal usage patterns. 

Second is the low humidity conditions 

normally encountered within the test 

chamber and the lack of refrigerator and 

freezer compartment door openings. 

Third. the time period between- defrost 

cycles would become excessively longer 

than that which would be expected 

under normal usage conditions. This 

lengthening of the period between 

defrost cycles increases the duration of 

the test such that the test is unduly 

burdensome to conduct. Information 

contained in Whirlpool's petitions for 

waiver for its ADC device show that 

door opening frequency and duration 

are heavily weighted factors in 

determining the time between defrost 

periods. 

DOE began its development of a VDC 

test procedure by reviewing the waivers 

issued and consulting NBS in evaluating 

data and alternate test procedures. NBS 

prepared comments analyzing the two 

methods used in the waivers and offered 

alternatives for the new test procedure. 

Concurrent with the NBS evaluation of 

VDC test procedures, AHAM provided 

DOE a copy of "Recommended Test 

Procedure for Determining The Energy 

Consumption for Adaptive Defrost 

Refrigerator-Freezers and Freezers." 

DOE evaluated the AHAM test 

procedure and is including it in today's 

proposal as an optional test procedure. 

As discussed below. DOE believes the 

AHAM proposed test procedure, a test 

procedure based on door openings, is a 

burdensome test method and therefore. 

not justified as a requirement for testing 

all VDC-equipped units. 

The primary issue in the 

determination of an appropriate VDC 

test procedure is the typical time 

between defrost cycles. In the review of 

the petitions for waiver, NBS concluded 

that the time between defrost cycles 

could be as much as three days (72 

hours). This would credit VDe-equipped 

units with 80 to 90 percent of the 

maximum energy reduction possible. 

Further analysis of this issue has led to 

an NBS study of variable defrost control 

and t.'1e impact of compressor run time 

for rating refrigerator-freezers.:! The 

study presents an analytical method of 

determining the variables in the rating 

procedure. DOE contacted Whirlpool 

Corporation in an effort to gather lest 

data for this proceeding. However. 

Whirlpool had no available data .other 

than that provided in Case No. RF-001. 

The Whirlpool data suggested that with 

limited door openings, ADC units could 

run for six days before defrosting. 

The Department's analysis of all 

available information has identified the 

ratio of compressor on-time (eT) to total 

on-time as typically 50 percent. This 

implies that an automatic defrost 

refrigerator-freezer equipped with a 12-

hour timer on the compressor should 

perform one defrost cycle every 24 

hours. or once a day. The compressor 

on-time for VDC models is only one factor used in the control algorithm 3 to 

determine the time between defrost 

cycles. Other factors evaluated in the 

algorithm include door openings. 

previous defrost duration, frost build-up, 

and consumer usage factors. 

The value of CT calculated using the 

NBS recommended approach can differ 

from the value measured in the field due 

to variations in consumer behavior. The 

manufacturer establishes the degree of 

importance assigned to the factors that 

determine defrost time. The duration 

between defrost cycles and the value of 

CT are affected by how the -

manufacturer's algorithm views the 

consumer usage pattern. Since the 

consumer usage pattern is an uncontrollable variable. even for a 

standard size family, the only 

controllable element is the 

manufacturer's input to the algorithm. 

Therefore. DOE deternlined that the 

input values selected by the 

manufacturer should have boundaries. 

Since tlle compressor on-time (CT) 

between defrosts does not reach infinity 

and is not zero for VDC-equipped 

models, the value CT is bounded by a 

minimum or least time (CTL) and a maximum time (CTM).4 These values 

are specified by the manufacturer and 

included in the VDC algorithm. NBS 

evaluated the effect CT had on the per 

day energy consumption. As part of this 

evaluation, a frequency factor (F) was 

created to express the ratios between 

CT, CTL, and CTM' NBS determined 

that the value CT had significant effect 

• "Energy Rating of Refrigerators with Variable 

Defrost Controls" Bal Mchajan PH.D., PL, Nation,,1 

Bureau of Standards. May 7.1967. 

3 Algorithm-A mathematical rule or procedure 

for solving a problem. 

• A value of infinity would mean tha the unit never defrosts while zero would result in the unit 

constantly defrosting. 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

37418 Federal Register I Vol. 53. No.' 186 I Monday, September 26. 1988 I Proposed Rules 

on per day energy consumption when 

defrost cycles are spaced 6 to 12 hours 

apart and a lesser effect as the time 

between defrosts reached 72 hours of 

compressor on-time. Based on NBS's 

evaluation of various defrost cycles. 

DOE proposes that a value of 0.2 for F 

be representative of VDC-equipped 

units. Assuming a value of 0.2 for F. 

allows CT. and then enery use. to be 

calculated. 

The Decisions and Orders issued to 

Whirlpool (Cases No. RF.;.oo3. RF-004) 

and WCI (Case No. FR.;.oo2) did not 

assign a value for F to be used in the 

long-time automatic defrost equation. 

Rather. the value of CT was assigned 

based on NBS's review of each Petition 

for Waiver. Whirlpool was assigned a value of 36 hours for CT and WCI 

assigned 12 hours. Because CT varies by 

design based on the manufacturers' 

VDC algorithms. DOE examined 

alternatives to prescribing CT which 

would allow VDC-equipped models to 

be individually evaluated. NBS 

recommended setting a value of F based on the ratio of CTL and CTM. Based on its review of the petitions for waiver. 

NBS recommended boundaries for the 

values of CTL and CTM in the 

manufacturers' VDC algorithms. These 

boundaries are set at a minimum or CTL 

of 12 hours and a maximum or CTM of 

84 hours. 

AHMA recommended a different 

approach to determine the value of CT. 

involving the performance of a third test. 

The test includes door openings. 

multiple unit test data for statistical 

certainty. and specific (different) dry 

and wet bulb temperatures for the 

environmental chamber. AHAM 

provided field test data as support 

documentation. The data included 

information on door openings and time 

between defrost cycles in four 

geographical regions. 

AHAM recommended that a single 

basic model be tested and the test 

results be applied to each of the 

manufacturer's VDC-equipped models. 

AHAM indicated that this third test 

would be extremely burdensome if 

required for all models. DOE agrees that 

the test is burdensome because of the 

differing ambient temperature and 

humidity test conditions. extreme time 

requirement. over 100 hours. and the 

addition of door openings. DOE also 

believes that test results from one basic 

model can not be assigned to other basic 

models because varing door styles. 

capacities and features will impact test 

results. Therefore. DOE is proposing 

VDC-equipped models be tested 

according to the existing long-term 

defrost test. CT is to be calculated using 

a value for F of 0.2 and that at the 

manufacturer's option a test can be 

performed to determine CT. 

An optional third test is included in 

today's proposed rule which allows 

manufacturers to determine the value of 

F and CT. This third test is provided as an optional method of determining the 

value of CT for manufactures that 

believe the unit will operate with a substantially better frequency value 

than the F=0.2 established in the 

proposed rule. The burden associated 

with documenting an actual value for 

CT makes the optional testing of limited use to manufacturers. The test is based on procedures proposed by AHAM and 

modified by DOE. The only purpose of 

this test is to determine compressor on- time between defrosts for VDC equipped 

models. It has no application for any 

model equipped only with a compressor 

timer for automatic defrost or with no automatic defrost features. This test. 

which requires multiple units be tested 

for statistical compliance. involves door 

openings in an environmental chamber 

at specific new ambient conditions. The 

test requires a stabilization period 

consisting of three defrost intervals run from the end of one defrost to the end of 

the next defrost. The average duration 

beh'veen defrosts of the three intervals 

would establish the value of CT. 

The optional test includes 24 fresh 

food and six freezer compartment door 

openings each for 12±2 seconds. The 

purpose of these openings is to trigger 

the features other than compressor on- time in the manufacturer's algorithm. 

The door openings allow for the transfer 

of warm humid air into the respective 

compartment. thereby increasing frost 

build-up. Multiple units of the same model will be tested to achieve a 95 

percent confidence in the time between 

defrDsts. DOE believes that the time 

intensiveness of this optional test will 

lead most manufacturers to accept the 

DOE value of F and only those VDC 

systems with exceptionally better 

values for F will be tested. 

b. Method of Testing Dual Compressor 

Refrigerator-Freezer Units 

The concept of dual compressors was raised as an energy efficiency measure during the evaluation of energy 

conservation standard levels for 

refrigerator-freezers. This notice. 

however, does not address the 

effectiveness of dual compressors in 

energy efficiency. DOE is proposing to 

establish test procedures for automatic 

defrost refrigerator-freezers with dual 

compressor systems. 

A refrigerator-freezer model with a dual compressor system operates as two 

separate systems. one for each section 

of the cabinet. The existing test 

procedure assumes a single system. For 

the most part. the test procedure is 

unaffected by dual compressors. 

however. the defrost energy 

measurement portion of the test is 

affected. Since both compressor systems 

do not defrost at the same frequency or 

at the same time. the measurement of 

defrost energy is more complicated for a dual compressor system. The freezer 

section. although smaller than the 

refrigerator section. operates more often 

to maintain the colder temperature. The 

freezer section also builds frost faster. 

requiring more defrosts. 

To measure the energy consumption 

of dual compressor refrigerator-freezers. 

the DOE test procedure in Appendix A1 

is used. modified only for those models 

with automatic defrost. The testing 

difference occurs because measuring the 

defrost energy in automatic defrost 

models is affected by the more frequent 

operation of the freezer compressor 

system. which activates more defrosts. 

Assuming both defrost timers are set for 

12 hours of compressor on-time. the 

freezer will defrost sooner than the 

refrigerator. DOE proposes that an independent measurement of defrost 

energy for each system be performed. 

The test will measure the energy used 

for two defrost cycles for each system 

and the time elapsed between cycles. 

The freezer compressor is considered 

the primary system since the large 

temperature difference causes it to cycle more frequently than the refrigerator 

system. Both systems' energy 

measurements are included in the total 

energy equation. 

The test conditions remain the same. Additional measurement devices (watt 

meters. timers. etc.) are incorporated to measure the energy consumption of each 

compressor system. 

DOE expects this proposed method of 

evaluating energy consumption for dual 

compressor units to create a minimum 

burden on manufacturers and to provide a comparison with single compressor 

units. The proposed test procedures 

apply to automatic defrost units only; 

dual systems with manual defrost are to 

be tested according to the existing test 

procedure for single compressor units. 

c. Through~ The-Door-Features 

Several manufacturers. in an effort to 

provide the customer with increased 

utility and anticipated energy savings. 

have developed through-the-door. multidoor. and other special door features. 

These features could result in the unit 

using more energy during testing due to a lack of insulation. However. because 

the number of door openings could be 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

Federal Register I Vol. 53, No. 186 I Monday, September 26, 1988 I Proposed Rules 37419 

reduced, these features could also result 

in energy savings. These special 

features. however. provide utility in the 

form of convenient ice dispensing to the 

consumer. The existing DOE test 

procedure for refrigerators and 

refrigerator-freezers does not use actual 

door operJngs; instead. it increases t.;e 

surrounding temperature to increasf) 

heat transfer to compensate for the 

exchange of air that occurs during door 

openings and the internal loads. 

Therefore. the test procedure cannot measure any energy savings due to 

reduced door openings. 

The Department considered these new designs in its review of information and 

data for this rulemaking. However. DOE was unable to obtain sufficient 

documentation and/or test data from 

manufacturers. trade associations or professional organizations prior to this 

rulemaking concerning the energy 

consumption of a door opening. A 

review of previous rulemakings and 

available data indicated that one available option was to expand the 

refrigerator-freezer classes to include all 

door features. This was viewed as 

unacceptable because each feature 

would count the same. DOE also 

believes that t.'is option most likely 

would confuse consumers and reduce 

the potential for energy savings. A 

second option would be to amend the 

existing test procedure. However, no data has been presented to support 

claims that the energy saved by fewer 

large door openings saves energy above 

that used to compensate for increased 

door edge and gasket area and 

decreased door insulation. Altnough 

several manufacturers have expressed a desire to have the models so equipped 

receive a form of energy credit. the lack 

of data makes it difficult for DOE to 

justify amending the existing test 

procedure. Therefore, DOE is not 

including any measures in today's notice 

which would amend test procedures for 

refrigerator-freezer models with 

through-the-door features. refreshment 

centers, or multiple compartment/ 

multi door refrigerator or freezer 

sections. 

d. Rapid 01" Quick Freeze Feature 

The quick freeze feature is found 

primarily on freezers. DOE believes that 

this option is always consumer 

controlled. i.e .• it is operated (turned on 

and om manually. Activation of the 

quick freeze feature places the 

compressor in a steady-state condition. 

Its purpose is to freeze rapidly non- frozen items upon placement in the 

freezer. 

The quick freeze feature is an option 

being introduced on some new models 

of freezers. Since the current test 

procedure does not address manually 

operated options. DOE examined the 

adequacy of the test procedure to 

determine if it provides accurate and 

fair measures of energy consumption. By 

analyzing the option's function in the 

freezer, DOE determined that the quick 

freeze feature acts as a thermostat 

override. allowing the compressor to 

operate continuously. However. it also 

was apparent that the consumer could 

perform a similar function by adjusting 

the thermostat to the coldest setting. The 

quick freeze option. however. gives the 

consumer a single switch allowing the 

freezer to return to the original 

thermostat setting and, in some designs, 

includes a reminder light. 

DOE believes that the test procedure 

for freezers in Appendix B-1, 10 CFR 

Part 430 is sufficient for testing models 

equipped with manually operated 

features such as quick freeze. DOE 

proposes to amend the test procedure to 

indicate that the consumer operated 

feature. quick freeze. will remain off 

unless it is necessary to bypass the 

thermostat to cause the compressor to 

run continuously a.s described in section 

3.1 of Appendix Bl. By this amendment 

to the test procedure, DOE believes that 

an option with utility to the consumer 

will be rated fairly and accurately. 

III. Public Comment Procedu.--es 

a. 'Written Comment Procedures 

Interest persons are invited to 

participate in the rulemaking by 

submitting data. views. or arguments 

with respect to the proposed 

amendments set forth in this notice to 

the address indicated at the beginning of 

the notice. 

Comments should be identified on the 

outside of the envelope and on 

documents submitted to DOE with the 

designation "Refrigerators. 

Refrigerators-Freezers. and Freezers 

Test Procedures. Docket No. 80-118. 

Nine (9) copies are requested to be 

submitted. All comments received by 

the date specified at the beginning of 

this notice and all other relevant 

information wilLbe considered by DOE 

before final action is taken on the 

proposed regulations. Pursuant to the 

provisions of 10 CFR 1004.11, any person 

submitting information which he or she 

believes to be confidential and exempt 

by law from public disclosure should 

submit one complete copy of the 

document and 6 copies, if possible. from 

which the information believed to be 

confidential has been deleted. DOE will 

make its own determination with regard 

to the confidential status of the 

infomation and treat it according to its 

determination. 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluating requests to treat as confidential information that has been 

submitted include: (1) A description of 

the item; (2) an indication as to whether 

and why such items of information have 

been treated by the submitting party as 

confidential. and whether and why such 

items are customarily treated as 

confidential within the industry; (3) 

whether the information is generally 

known or available from other sources; 

(4) whether the information has 

previously been made available to 

others without obligation concerning its 

confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the 

competitive injury to the submitting 

person which would result from public 

disclosure; (6) an indication as to when 

such information might lose its 

confidential character due to the 

passage of time; and (7) whether 

disclosure of the information would be 

in the public interest. 

b. Public Hearing 

1. Procedures for Submitting Requests to 

Speak. 

The time and place of the public 

hearing are indicated at the beginning of 

this notice. DOE invites any person who 

has an interest in today's proposed rule, 

or who is a representative of a group or 

class of persons that has an interest in 

the proposed amendments, to make a 

request for a.n opportunity to make an oral presentation. Such requests should 

be directed to the address indicated at 

the beginning of this notice. Requests 

may be hand delivered to such address 

between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 

p.m .• Monday through Friday. Requests 

should be labeled "Refrigerators, 

Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers Test 

Procedures. Docket No. CAS-RM-8O118" both on the document and on the 

envelope. 

The person making the request should 

briefly describe the interest concerned 

and. if appropriate. state why he or she 

is a proper representative of the group 

or class of persons that have such an interest. and give a telephone number 

where he or she may be contacted. 

Each person to be heard is requested 

to submit seven (7) copies of his or her 

statement to the address and by the date 

given at the beginning of this notice. In 

the eveht any person wishing to testify 

cannot meet this requirement. 

alternative arrangements can be made 

with the Office of Hearing and Dockets 

in advance of the hearing by so indicating in the letter requesting to 

make an oral presentation. 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

'37420 Federal Register I Vol. 53. No. 186 I Monday. September 26. 1988 I Proposed Rules 

2. Conduct of Hearing 

DOE reserves the right to select the 

persons to be heard at this hearing. to 

schedule the respective presentations, 

and to establish the procedures 

governing the conduct of the hearing. 

Each presentation shall be limited to 20 

minutes. 

A DOE official will be designated to 

preside at the hearing. The hearing will 

not be a judicial or an evidentiary-type 

hearing. but will be conducted in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553 and 

section 336 of the Act. At the conclusion 

of all initial oral statements. each person 

who has made an oral statement will be 

given the opportunity to make a rebuttal 

statement. The rebuttal statements will 

be given in the order in which the 

official statements were made and will 

be subject to time limitations. 

Any interested person who wishes to 

ask a question at the hearing may 

submit the question. in writing. to the 

presiding officer to be asked of any 

person making a statement at the 

hearing. The presiding officer will 

determine whether the question is 

relevant and whether time limitations 

permit it to. be presented for an answer. A transcript of the hearing will be 

made and the entire record of the 

hearing. including the transcript. will be 

retained by DOE and made available for 

inspection at the DOE Freedom of 

Informationil.eading Room. Room lE152. Forrestal Building. 1000 

Independence Avenue. SW .• 

Washington. DC. between the hours of 

8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m .• Monday through 

Friday. For information concerning the 

availability of records at the Freedom of 

Information Reading Room. call (202) 

58S-6020. In addition. any person may 

purchase a copy of the hearing 

transcript from the reporter. 

IV. Environmental Review 

Pursuant to section 7{c)(2) of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974. a copy of this notice has been 

submitted to the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency for his 

comments concerning the impact of this 

proposal on the quality of the 

environment. 

Since test procedures under the 

energy conservation program for consumer products will be used only to 

standardize the measurement of energy 

usage. and will not affect the quality of 

distribution of energy usage. prescribing 

test procedures will not result in any 

environmental impacts. DOE. therefore. 

has determined that prescribing test 

procedures under the energy 

conservation program for consumer products clearly is not a major Federal 

action significantly affecting the quality 

of the human environment within the 

meaning of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969. Consequently. 

neither an Environmental Statement nor an Environmental Assessment is 

required for the proposed rule. 

V. Review Under Executive Order 12291 

The proposed rule has been reviewed 

in accordance with Executive Order 

12291 which directs that all regulations 

achieve their intended goals without 

imposing unnecessary burdens on the 

economy. on individuals. on public or private organizations. or on State and 

local governments. The Executive Order 

also requires that regulatory impact 

analyses be prepared for "major rules." 

The Executive Order defines "maj,or 

rule" as any regulation that is.likely to 

result in: (1) An annual effect on the :.. economy of $100 million or more; (2) a 

major increase in costs or prices for consumers. individual industries. 

Federal. State. or local government 

agencies. or geographic regions; or (3) 

significant adverse effects on competition. employment. investment. 

productivity. innovation. or on the 

ability of the United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic or export 

markets. 

The proposed rule would amend 

already-existing test procedures for 

refrigerators. refrigerator-freezers. and 

freezers. DOE has determined that any 

. burden imposed on any person. industry. or government entity by the amendment 

of extent procedures. based in part on commercial standards. is not significant 

to bring the proposed rules within the 

definition of "major rule." 

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act. Pub. L. 

96-345 (5 U.S.C. 601-612). requires that an agency prepare an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis to be published at 

the time the proposed rule is published. 

This requirement (which appears in 

section 603) does not apply if the agency 

"certifies that the rule will not. if 

promulgated. have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities." The proposed 

rule affects manufacturers of 

refrigerators. refrigerator-freezers. and 

freezers. As previously discussed. the 

proposed changes would not have 

significant economic impact. but rather 

would simply improve the test 

procedures. Therefore. DOE certifies 

that the proposed rule. if promulgated. 

would not have a "significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities." 

vn. "Takings" Assessment Review 

Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859. 

March 18. 1988) directs that. in 

proposing a regulation. an agency 

conduct a "takings" review. Such a review is intended to assist agencies in 

avoiding unnecessary takings and help 

such agencies account for those takings 

that are necessitated by statutory 

mandate. 

For purposes of the Order: 

"Policies that have takings 

implications" refers to Federal 

regulations. proposed Federal 

regulations. proposed Federal 

legislation. comments on proposed 

Federal legislation. or other Federal 

policy statements that. if implemented or enacted. could effect a taking. such as rules and regulations that propose or 

implement licensing. permitting. or other 

condition requirements or limitations on private property use. or that require 

dedications or exactions from owners of 

private property. 

It appears that there are three parts of 

the appliance standards program that 

could conceivably be viewed as having 

"takings implications." These are testing 

(certification) requirements. the impacts 

of standard levels. and possible DOE 

testing of products for validation. 

This proposed rulemaking is 

concerned with the first part. namely, 

testing. The Department believes that 

such a requirement does not constitute a "taking" of private property. The 

establishment of test procedures 

involves no exchange of property. 

Manufacturers maintain control of the 

property for all intents and purposes. 

Therefore. the Department believes 

that the requirement of testing and the 

establishment of test procedures as part 

of the appliance standards program do 

not represent a "taking" under the 

provisions of E.O. 12630. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430. 

Administrative practice and 

procedure. Energy conservation. 

Household appliances. 

In consideration of the foregoing. it is 

proposed to amend Part 430 of Chapter 

II of Title 10. Code of Federal 

Regulations. as set forth below. 

Issued in Washington. DC. September 9. 

1988. 

Donrul R. Fitzpatrick. 

Assistant Secretary. Conservation and 

Renewable Energy. 

PART 43O-ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

1. The authority citation for Part 430 

continues to read as follows: 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

Federal Register I Vol. 53. No. 186 I Monday. September 26. 1988 I Proposed Rules· 

Authority: Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act. Title III. Part B. as amended by National 

Energy Conservation Policy Act, Title IV. Part 

2. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) and National 

Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 

(4Z U.S.C. 6291-6309). 

2. Subpart B of Part 430 is amended by 

adding sections 1.11, 3.3. 4.1.2.2. 4.1.2.3. 

4.1.2.4, 5.2.1.3. 5.2.1.4, and 5.2.1.5 and 

adding a sentence at the end of sections 

2.1. 3.2. 4.1.2. and 5.1.2 of Appendix Al as follows: 

Appendix A1 (Alternative) to Subpart B 

of Part 430-Uniform Test Method for 

Measuring the Energy Consumption of 

Electric Refrigerators and Electric 

Refrigerator-Freezers 

* * * 

1.11 "Variable Defrost Control" means a 

long-time automatic defrost system (except 

the 14-hour defrost qualification does not 

apply) where successive defrost cycles are 

determined by an operating condition 

variable or variables other than solely 

compressor operating time. This inchi'des any 

electrical or mechanical device. Demand 

defrost is a type of variable defrost contro!' 

2.1' •• The ambient temperature shall be 

80 ± 2'P dry bulb and 67 ± l'P wet bulb 

during the stabilization period and during the 

test period when the unit is tested in 

accordance with section 3.3. 

* 

3.2' •• Variable defrost control models: 

5' F ( -15' C) freezer compartment 

temperature and 38 ± 2'F fresh food 

compartment temperature during steady-state 

conditions with no door openings. If both 

settings cannot be obtained. then test vvith 

the fresh food compartment temperature at 38 

± 2'P and the freezer compartment as close . to 5°F as possible. 

* * 

3.3 Variable Defrost Control Optional Test. 

After a steady-state condition is achieved. 

the optional test requires door openings for 12 

± 2 second every 60 minutes on the fresh 

food compartment door and a simultaneous 

12 ± 2 second freezer compartment door 

opening occuring every 4th time. to obtain 

fresh food and six freezer compartment door 

openings per 24-hour period. The first freezer 

door opening shall be simultaneous with the 

fourth fresh food door opening. The doors are 

to be opened 60 to 90' with an average 

velocity for the leading edge of the door of 

approximately 2 FT/Sec. Prior to the 

initiation of the door opening sequence. the 

refrigerator defrost control mechanism may 

be re-initiated in order to minimize the test 

duration. 

4.1.2' • • If the model being tested has a 

variable defrost control. the provisions of 

section 4.1.2.2 or .3 shall apply. If the model 

has a dual compressor system the provisions 

of 4.1.2.4 shall apply. 

4.1.2.2 Variable Defrost Control. If the 

model being tested has a variable defrost 

control system. the test shall consist of three 

parts. Two parts shall be the same as the test 

for long-time automatic defrost (section 

4.1.2.1). The third part is the optional test to 

determine the time between defrost (section 

5.2.1.3). The third part is used by 

manufacturers that choose not to accept the 

DOE value fol' F of 0.20. to calcuate CT. 

4.1.2.3 Variable Defrost Control OptioJlal 

Test. After steady-state conditions with no 

door openings are achieved in accordance 

with section 3.3 above. the test is continued 

using the above daily door opening sequence 

until stabilized operation is achieved. 

Stabilization is defined as a minimum of 

three consecutive defrost cycles with times 

between defrost that will allow the 

calculation of a Mean Time Between Defrosts 

(MTBDl) that satisfies the statistical 

relationship of 95 percent confidence.' The 

test is repeated on at least one more unit of 

the model and until the Mean Time Between 

Defrosts for the multiple unit tests (MTBD2) 

satisfies the statistical relationship. If the 

time between defrosts is greater than 84 

hours [compressor on time} and this defrost 

period can be repeated on a second unit. the 

test may be terminated at 84 hours [CT) and 

the absolute time value used for MTBD for 

each unit. 

4.1.2.4. Dual Compressor Systems with 

Automatic Defrost. If the model being tested 

has separate compressor systems for the 

refrigerator and freezer sections. then the two 

part method in 4.1.2.1 shall be used. The 

second part of the method will be conducted 

separately for each system. 

* * 

5.1.2' * • Por models equipped with 

variable defrost controls. compartment 

temperatures shall be those measured in the 

first part of the test period specified in 4.1.2.2 

above. 

* * * 

5.2.1.3 Variable Defrost Control. The 

energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per 

day shall be calculat.A equivalent to: 

ET = (1440 X EPl/T1) "1 (EP2 - (EPl X T2/ 

n)X12/CT 

where ET and 1440 are defined in 5.2.1.1 and 

EPl. EP2, n. T2 and 12 are defined in 

5.2.1.2 

cf = (CTdCT .. J (F X leT .. - CTd + 

CTd 

CT L = least or shortest time between 

defrosts in tenths of an hour (but not less 

than 12 hours) 

CTM = maximum time between defrost 

cycles in tenths of an hour (but not more 

than 84 hours) 

F = ratio of per day energy consumption in 

excess of the least energy and the 

maximum difference in per day energy 

consumption 

F = (l!CT - l/CTM)!(l/CTL - l/CTM) = (ET-ETd/(ETM-ETJ 

or F = 0.20 in lieu of testing to find CT 

ET L = least electrical energy used (kilowatt 

hours) 

ET .. = maximum electrical energy used 

(kilowatt hours) 

5.2.1.4 Optional Test lHethod for Variable 

Defrost Controls. 

CT = MTBD X 0.5 

where 

MTBD = mean time between defrosts 

MTBD 

where 

X = time between defrost cycles 

N = number of defrost cycles 

l:x 

N 

5.2.1.5 DuaJ Compressor Systems with 

Automatic Defrost. The two part test method 

in 4.1.2.2 must be used. the energy 

consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall 

be calculated equivalent to: 

ET == (1440 X EP1/T1) + (EP2 - (EP. - [EPF 

X TZ/T1J) X 12iCTF + (EPa - EPa X T3/ 

n)} X lZ/CTa) 

where ET, 1440. EPl. n. EPZ. 12. and CT are 

defined in 5.2.1.2 

EPF = energy expended in kilowatt-hours 

during the second part of the test for the 

freezer system. 

EPa = energy expended in kilowatt-hours 

during the second pari of the test for the 

refrigerator system. 

T2 and T3 = length of time in minutes of the 

second test part for the freezer and 

refrigerator systems respectively. 

CTF = compressor on-time between freezer 

defrosts (tenths of an hour). 

CT a = compressor on-time between 

refrigerator defrosts (tenths of an hour). 

* * * * 

3. Subpart B. Part 430 is amended by 

adding sections 1.10. 1.11. 3.3. 4.1.2.2. 

4.1.2.3. 5.2.1.3. and 5.2.1.4 and adding a sentence to the end of sections 2.1, 2.2., 

3.1. 3.2. 4.1.2. and 5.1.2 of Appendix HI 

as follows: 

Appendix Bt (Alternative) to Subpart B 

of Part 430-Uniform Test Method for 

Measul'ing the Energy Consumption of 

Freezers 

* 

1.10 "Variable Defrost Control" means a 

long-time automatic defrost system (except 

the H-hour defrost qualification does not 

apply) where successive defrost cycles are 

determined by an operating condition 

variable or variables other than solely 

compressor operating time. This includes any 

electrical or mechanical device. Demand 

defrost is a type of variable defrost control. 

1.11 "Quick freeze" means optional feature 

on freezers which is initiated manually and 

shut off manually. it by-passes the thermostat 

control and places the compressor in a 

steady-stale operating condition until it is 

shut off. 

2.1 • • • The ambient temperature shall be 

80±Z·P dry bulb Gnd 67"F wet bulb during 

the stabilization period and during the tesl 

period when the unit is tesled in accordance 

with section 3.3. 

2.2' • • The quick freeze option shall be 

switched off unless specified. 

• 

3.1 • •• If the model has the quick freeze 

option. it is to be used to by-pass the 

temperature control. 
CAS-RM-80-118 COMMENT 0E

37422 Federal Register I Vol. 53, No. 186 I Monday, September 26, 19881 ProposodRtiles 

3.2' • * Variable defrost control models 

shall achieve 0±2° during the steady-state 

conditions prior to the optional test with no door openings. 

3.3 Variable Defrost Control Optional Test. 

After a steady-state condition is achieved. 

the door opening sequence is initiated with a 18 ±2·F second freezer door opening 

occurring every eight hours to obtain three 

door openings per 24-hour period. The first 

freezer door opening shall occur at the 

initiation of the test period. The door(s) are to 

be opened 60 to 90· with an average velocity 

for the leading edge of the door of 

approximately two feet per second. Prior to 

the initiation of the door opening sequence. 

the freezer defrost control mechanism may be 

re-initialized in order to minimize the test 

duration. 

* * * 

4.1.2' * • If the model'being tested has a 

variable defrost control the provisions of 

4.1.2.2. shall apply. 

* * 

4.1.2.2 Variable Defrost Control. If the 

model being tested has a variable defrost 

control system. the test shall consist of three 

parts. Two parts shall be the same as the test 

for long-time automatic defrost in accordance 

with section 4.1.2.1 above. The third part is 

the optional test to determine the time 

between defrosts (5.2.1.3). The third part is 

used by manufacturers that choose not to 

accept the DOE value for G of 0.20. to 

calculate CT. 

4.1.2.3 Variable Defrost Control Optional 

Test. After steady-state conditions with no 

. door openings are achieved in accordance 

with section 3.3 above. the test is continued 

using the above daily door opening sequence 

· until stabilized operation is achieved. 

Stabilization is dermed as a minimum of 

three consecutive defrost cycles with times 

between defrost that will allow the 

calculation of a Mean Time Between Defrosts 

(MTBD1) that satisfies the statistical 

relationship of 95 percent confidence. The 

test is repeated on at least one more unit of 

· the model and until the Mean Time Between 

Defrosts for the multiple unit tests (MTBD2) 

satisfies the statistical relationship. If the 

time between defrosts is greater than 84 

hours (compressor on time) and this defrost 

period can be repeated on a second unit. the 

test may be terminated at 84 hours (CT) and 

the absolute time value used for MTBD for 

· each unit. 

* • 

5.1.2' • • For models equipped with 

variable defrost controls. compartment 

temperatures shall be those measured in the 

first part of the test period specified in 4.1.2.2. 

* * 

5.2.1.3 Variable Defrost COlltrol. The 

· energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per 

day shall be calculated equivalent to: 

ET=(1440XEPl/Tl)+(EP2-(EPlxT2! 

Tl)X12/CT 

where ET and 1440 are defined in 5.2.1.1 and 

EPl. EP2, Tl. T2 and 12 are defined in 

5.2.1.2 

CT= (CTJCTM1/(FXlCTM-CTJ +CTJ 

where 

CTL=least or shortest time between defrost 

in tenths· of an·hour:(.bttlnot less than 12 

hours) 

CTM=maximum time between defrost cycles 

in tenths of an hour (but not more than 84 

hour&) 

F=ratio otper·day energy conswnption in 

excess of the least energy and the 

maximum difference in per day energy 

consumption 

F=(l/CT -l/CTIIlJl(l/CT L -1/ 

CT..)=(ET-ETJ!(ET",-ETJ 

F =0.20 in lieu of testing to find CT 

where 

ET L = least electrical- energy consumed. in 

kilowatt hours 

ETM=maximum electrical energy consumed. 

in kilowatt hours 

5.2;U 'Varidb1e Defrost Control Optional 

Test. Perform the optional test for variable 

defrost control models to find CT. 

CT=MTBDxO.5 

MTBD = mean time between defrosts 

MTBD 

X=lime between defrost cycles 

N=number of defrost cycles 

* * 

N 

[FR Doc. 88-21860 Filed ~23-88; 8:45 am] 

BIWHG CODE 8450-o1-M