20832 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

(f) Discontinuance. Term allotments 

will be discontinued automatically on 

expiration of the 1 year withholding 

period, or on the death, retirement, or 

separation of the allotter from the 

Federal service, whichever is earlier. 

(1) An allotter may revoke a term 

authorization at any time by requesting 

it in writing from the payroll office. 

Discontinuance will be effective the first 

pay period beginning after receipt of the 

written revocation in the payroll office. 

(2) A discontinued allotment will not 

be reinstated. 

(g) Transfer. When an allotter moves 

to another organizational unit, whether 

in the same office or a different 

Department or agency, his or her 

allotment authorization must be 

transferred to the new payroll office. 

Subpart H—Accounting and 

Distribution 

§ 950.801 Accounting and distribution. 

(a) Remittance. One electronic funds 

transfer (EFT) will be transmitted by the 

payroll office each pay period, in the 

gross amount of deductions on the basis 

of current authorizations, to each 

charity/federation or to the CCA as 

determined by the Director. 

(1) Should the distribution be made to 

the CCA, the EFT will be accompanied 

by an electronic transmittal identifying 

the Federal agency, the dates of the pay 

period, the pay period number, 

employee names and deduction 

amounts per individual employee. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(b) Accounting. (1) OPM may require 

Federal payroll offices to oversee the 

establishment of individual allotment 

accounts, the deductions each pay 

period, and the reconciliation of 

employee accounts in accordance with 

agency and Federal Accounting 

Standards and Office of Management 

and Budget requirements. OPM may 

further require that Federal payroll 

offices ensure the accuracy of 

remittances, as supported by current 

allotment authorizations, and internal 

accounting and auditing requirements. 

(2) The CCA shall notify the 

federations, national and international 

organizations, and local organizations as 

soon as practicable after the completion 

of the campaign, but in no case later 

than a date to be determined by OPM, 

of the amounts, if any, designated to 

them and their member agencies. The 

date will be part of the annual timetable 

issued by the Director under 

§ 950.601(b). The CCA is also 

responsible for distributing credit card 

receipts and, if determined by the 

Director, payroll deductions transmitted 

by the payroll offices. It is responsible 

for the accuracy of disbursements it 

transmits to recipients. The CCA will 

distribute all CFC receipts beginning 

April 1, and quarterly thereafter. It shall 

remit the contributions to each 

organization or to the federation, if any, 

of which the organization is a member. 

At the close of each disbursement 

period, the CFC account shall have a 

balance of zero, based on the last 

reconciled bank statement. 

(3) Federated organizations, or their 

designated agents, are responsible for: 

(i) The accuracy of distribution among 

the charitable organizations of 

remittances from the payroll offices 

and/or CCA; and 

(ii) Arrangements for an independent 

audit conducted by a certified public 

accountant agreed upon by the 

participating charitable organizations. 

[FR Doc. 2013–08017 Filed 4–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–46–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–TP–0061] 

RIN 1904–AC65 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products and Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment: 

Test Procedures for Showerheads, 

Faucets, Water Closets, Urinals, and 

Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) proposes amendments to 

its May 2012 notice of proposed 

rulemaking related to DOE test 

procedures for showerheads, faucets, 

water closets, urinals, and commercial 

prerinse spray valves. The amendments 

proposed in this supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking include revisions 

to the definitions of showerhead and 

hand-held showerhead; removal of body 

sprays from the proposed showerhead 

definition; requirements pertaining to 

testing of showerheads that are 

components of shower towers; a 

standardized test method to be used 

when verifying the mechanical retention 

of a showerhead flow control insert 

when subjected to 8 pounds force; 

clarification of permissible trim 

adjustments for tank-type water closets; 

and amendments to the required static 

test pressures to be used when testing 

flushometer valve siphonic and blowout 

water closets. DOE also proposes further 

clarification of the definition of basic 

model with respect to flushometer valve 

water closets and urinals, as well as 

associated changes to certification 

reporting requirements for these 

products. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information regarding this SNOPR 

no later than May 8, 2013. See section 

IV, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

submit comments, identified by docket 

number EERE–2011–BT–TP–0061 or 

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 

1904–AC65, by any of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: PlumbingPrds-2011–TP– 

0061@ee.doe.gov. Include the docket 

number and/or RIN in the subject line 

of the message. 

3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

CD. It is not necessary to include 

printed copies. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 586–2945. If possible, please 

submit all items on a CD. It is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see section IV of this document (‘‘Public 

Participation’’). 

Docket: The docket, including Federal 

Register notices, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials, is available for 

review at regulations.gov. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the regulations.gov index. However, not 

all documents listed in the index may 

be publicly available, such as 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure. 

A link to the docket Web page can be 

found at: http://www.regulations.gov/#

!docketDetail;dct=FR%252BPR%252BN

%252BO%252BSR%252BPS;rpp=10;

po=0;D=EERE-2011-BT-TP-0061. This 

Web page will contain a link to the 

docket for this notice on the 

regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov 

Web page will contain simple 

instructions on how to access all 

documents, including public comments, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 20833 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. 

in the docket. See section IV, ‘‘Public 

Participation,’’ for information on how 

to submit comments through 

regulations.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment, review other public 

comments and the docket, contact Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by 

email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Lucas Adin, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1317. Email: 

Lucas.Adin@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General 

Counsel, GC–71, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121. Telephone: (202) 287–6111. 

Email: 

Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority 

A. Authority 

B. Background 

C. General Test Procedure Rulemaking 

Process 

II. Discussion 

A. DOE Test Procedures for Plumbing 

Products 

1. Definitions 

2. Test Procedure for Showerhead Flow 

Control Insert 

a. Pulling-Force Test 

b. Gravity Test 

c. Conclusions Based on DOE Testing 

3. Test Procedure Amendment for Supply 

Fittings With Integral Body Sprays 

4. Test Procedure Amendments for Gravity 

Flush Tank Water Closet Trim 

Adjustments 

5. Static Test Pressure for Flushometer 

Valve Siphonic and Blowout Water 

Closets 

6. Testing and Reporting of Dual-Flush 

Water Closets 

B. Supplementary Plumbing Requirements 

1. Definition of a Basic Model for Water 

Closets and Urinals 

2. Minor Editorial Changes 

III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Background and Authority 

A. Authority 

Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), 

Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291– 

6309, as codified), established the 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products Other Than 

Automobiles, which includes the 

showerheads, faucets, water closets, and 

urinals that are the subjects of today’s 

notice.1

Under EPCA, this program consists 

essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) 

labeling, (3) Federal energy and water 

conservation standards, and (4) 

certification and enforcement 

procedures. The testing requirements 

include test procedures that 

manufacturers of covered products must 

use as the basis for (1) certifying to the 

DOE that their products comply with 

applicable energy and water 

conservation standards adopted under 

EPCA and (2) making representations 

about the energy or water consumption 

of those products on labels and other 

materials. Similarly, DOE must use 

these test procedures to determine 

whether the products comply with any 

relevant standards promulgated under 

EPCA. 

B. Background 

EPCA states that the procedures for 

testing and measuring the water use of 

faucets and showerheads shall be 

American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers (ASME) Standard 

A112.18.1M–1989, ‘‘Plumbing Fixture 

Fittings,’’ and the test procedure for 

water closets and urinals shall be ASME 

Standard A112.19.6–1990, ‘‘Hydraulic 

Requirements for Water Closets and 

Urinals.’’ EPCA further specifies that if 

ASME revises these requirements, the 

Secretary of Energy (Secretary) shall 

adopt such revisions if they conform to 

the basic statutory requirements for test 

procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(7)–(8)) 

DOE last amended test procedures for 

these products in a final rule published 

in March 1998 (March 1998 final rule), 

which incorporated by reference ASME 

Standard A112.18.1M–1996, ‘‘Plumbing 

Fixture Fittings,’’ for showerheads and 

faucets, and ASME Standard A112.19.6– 

1995, ‘‘Hydraulic Performance 

Requirements for Water Closets and 

Urinals,’’ for water closets and urinals. 

63 FR 13308 (March 18, 1998). Since 

publication of the March 1998 final rule, 

ASME has revised both procedures and 

harmonized them with the 

corresponding standards of the 

Canadian Standards Association (CSA). 

ASME and CSA issued the most recent 

version for showerheads and faucets in 

June 2011 as ASME A112.18.1–2011/ 

CSA B125.1–11, ‘‘Plumbing Supply 

Fittings,’’ and issued the most recent 

version for water closets and urinals in 

August 2008 as ASME A112.19.2–2008/ 

CSA B45.1–08, ‘‘Ceramic Plumbing 

Fixtures.’’ These standards are referred 

to in this notice as ASME A112.18.1– 

2011 and ASME A112.19.2–2008, 

respectively. 

On May 30, 2012, DOE issued a notice 

of proposed rulemaking (the May 2012 

NOPR) proposing to amend the test 

procedures for showerheads, faucets, 

water closets, and urinals to incorporate 

by reference, with the exception of 

certain provisions regarding rounding of 

measured values, ASME A112.18.1– 

2011 and ASME A112.19.2–2008. 77 FR 

31742, 31744. DOE also proposed to 

update its reference to the latest version 

of the ASTM International (ASTM) 

standard for commercial prerinse spray 

valves by incorporating by reference 

ASTM Standard F2324–03 (2009), 

‘‘Standard Test Method for Prerinse 

Spray Valves.’’ 77 FR at 31744. In the 

May 2012 NOPR, DOE also proposed 

additional provisions, including test 

procedures for measuring representative 

average flush volume for dual-flush 

water closets; requested comments on 

the standardized test method for 

showerhead flow control insert 

retention requirement; proposed 

definitions related to showerheads, 

body sprays, and hand-held 

showerheads; and proposed 

clarifications to the basic model 

definition with respect to water closets 

and urinals. 77 FR at 31746–31748. 

In response to DOE’s proposed test 

procedure amendments, as presented in 

the May 2012 NOPR, several interested 

parties provided comments. DOE has 

considered all submitted comments and 

conducted additional analyses in 

preparation of a revised proposal to 

amend the test procedures for 

showerheads, faucets, water closets, and 

urinals, as presented in this 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (SNOPR). A more detailed 

discussion of the comments received 

and DOE’s response is provided in 

section II, ‘‘Discussion.’’ This SNOPR 

addresses only proposed modifications 

to its earlier proposal and those 

comments received in response to the 

NOPR that are relevant to the proposed 

changes. All other comments received 

regarding the May 2012 NOPR will be 

addressed in the test procedure final 

rule. 

In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to 

revise the definitions of showerhead 

and hand-held showerhead; proposes to 

remove body sprays from the definition 

of the term showerhead proposed in the 

NOPR; proposes a standardized test 

method for the mechanical retention of 

a showerhead flow control insert when 

subjected to 8 pounds force (lbf); 

provides clarification of allowable trim 

adjustments for gravity flush tank water 

closets; and proposes amendments to 

the required static test pressures when 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20834 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

testing flushometer valve siphonic and 

blowout water closets. DOE also 

proposes further clarification of the 

definition of basic model with respect to 

flushometer water closets and urinals, 

as well as associated changes to 

certification reporting requirements, 

including specific provisions regarding 

the testing and reporting of dual-flush 

water closets. 

C. General Test Procedure Rulemaking 

Process 

In 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the 

criteria and procedures DOE must 

follow when prescribing or amending 

test procedures for covered products. 

EPCA provides, in relevant part, that 

any test procedures prescribed or 

amended under this section shall be 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results that measure energy efficiency, 

energy use, water use (in the case of 

showerheads, faucets, water closets, and 

urinals), or estimated annual operating 

cost of a covered product during a 

representative average use cycle or 

period of use and shall not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)(3)) 

In addition, if DOE determines that a 

test procedure amendment is warranted, 

it must publish proposed test 

procedures and offer the public an 

opportunity to present oral and written 

comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)(2)) Finally, in any rulemaking to 

amend test procedures, DOE must 

determine to what extent, if any, the 

proposed test procedures would alter 

the measured energy efficiency of any 

covered product as determined under 

the existing test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(e)(1)) If DOE determines that the 

amended test procedures would alter 

the measured efficiency of a covered 

product, DOE must amend the 

applicable energy conservation standard 

accordingly. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) 

Any representation as to the water 

consumption of the products that are 

the subjects of this rulemaking made 

180 days after the date of publication of 

an amended test procedure final rule 

must be based upon results generated 

under the applicable provisions of any 

amended test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(c)(2)) However, the 180 day period 

may be extended for an additional 180 

days if the Secretary determines that 

this requirement would impose an 

undue burden. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) 

Upon the compliance date(s) of any 

amended water conservation standard(s) 

for faucets and showerheads, use of the 

applicable provisions of the amended 

test procedures to demonstrate 

compliance with the water conservation 

standard(s) will also be required. 

II. Discussion 

On July 24, 2012, DOE held a public 

meeting to discuss proposed 

amendments to the test procedures for 

showerheads, faucets, water closets, and 

urinals presented in the May 2012 

NOPR. During the public meeting, and 

in subsequent written comments, 

interested parties provided DOE with 

feedback on the proposed test procedure 

amendments. These comments are 

available for viewing in the public 

docket for this rulemaking (Docket No. 

EERE–2011–BT–TP–0061). Comments 

from interested parties addressed in this 

SNOPR involve the following issues: 

1. DOE’s definitions of showerhead, 

body spray, and hand-held shower; 

2. Test procedure requirements for 

showerhead flow control insert 

retention; 

3. The definition of basic model with 

respect to water closets and urinals; 

4. Trim adjustments for gravity flush 

tank water closets; 

5. Static pressures for testing of 

flushometer valve siphonic and blowout 

water closets; and 

6. Testing and reporting of dual-flush 

water closets. 

Specific comments received from 

interested parties and DOE’s responses 

are set forth in sections II.A and II.B of 

this document. 

A. DOE Test Procedures for Plumbing 

Products 

1. Definitions 

In the May 2012 NOPR, DOE 

proposed a modification to the 

definition of ‘‘showerhead’’ based on 

the definition in ASME A112.18.1– 

2011. DOE’s proposed definition in the 

May 2012 NOPR stated that a 

‘‘showerhead means an accessory, or set 

of accessories, to a supply fitting 

distributed in commerce for attachment 

to a single supply fitting, for spraying 

water onto a bather, typically from an 

overhead position, including body 

sprays and hand-held showers, but 

excluding safety showerheads.’’ 77 FR at 

31755. DOE proposed this modified 

form of the ASME definition to more 

clearly define the extent of DOE’s 

coverage of these products, and to 

clarify that safety shower showerheads 

are not covered products, and that handheld showerheads are covered. 

In response, Kohler Company (Kohler) 

and Sloan Valve Company (Sloan Valve) 

recommended that, for consistency with 

the ASME standard, DOE should use the 

showerhead definition found in ASME 

A112.18.1–2011: ‘‘An accessory to a 

supply fitting for spraying water onto a 

bather, typically from the overhead 

position.’’ (Kohler, No. 9 at p. 4 Sloan 

Valve, No. 12 at p. 3) The National 

Resources Defense Council (NRDC) 

commented that a showerhead should 

not be defined as an accessory. (NRDC, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 

54–55) 

Comments submitted by Plumbing 

Manufacturers International (PMI), 

Moen Incorporated (Moen), and Kohler 

stated that body sprays should not be 

included in the definition of 

showerhead because body sprays are not 

considered accessories since they 

cannot be readily added or removed by 

the user. (PMI, No. 8 at p. 4; Moen, No. 

4 at p. 3; Kohler, No. 9 at p. 4) On the 

contrary, NRDC supported the 

incorporation of body sprays in the 

showerhead definition. (NRDC, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 57–58) 

The International Code Council (ICC) 

supported DOE’s proposed showerhead 

definition and recommended that the 

term ‘‘showerhead’’ be incorporated in 

the definition of body spray to clearly 

indicate that body sprays are considered 

a form of showerhead. (ICC, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 55–56) 

DOE has determined that the current 

ASME showerhead definition, 

recommended by Kohler and Sloan, 

does not sufficiently address DOE’s 

regulatory coverage of showerheads by 

not specifically including hand-held 

showerheads or excluding safety shower 

showerheads. Further, although in the 

NOPR DOE sought to clarify that body 

sprays are showerheads for purposes of 

regulatory coverage, in light of the 

concerns that some commenters have 

raised regarding the proposal and DOE’s 

need to further study the issue, DOE 

withdraws its proposal to include body 

sprays in the showerhead definition at 

this time. Additionally, based on 

consideration of the comments received, 

DOE proposes in this SNOPR to exclude 

the term ‘‘accessory’’ from the definition 

of showerhead, and proposes to define 

‘‘showerhead’’ as follows: ‘‘A 

component of a supply fitting, or set of 

components distributed in commerce 

for attachment to a single supply fitting, 

for spraying water onto a bather, 

typically from an overhead position, 

including hand-held showerheads, but 

excluding safety shower showerheads.’’ 

Comments were also received from 

Moen, PMI, Kohler, and Sloan Valve 

during the public comment period 

following publication of the May 2012 

NOPR, requesting that DOE incorporate 

ASME’s draft definition of hand-held 

showerhead: ‘‘An accessory to a supply 

fitting, that can be hand-held or fixed in 

place for the purpose of spraying water 

onto a bather, and which is connected 

to a flexible hose.’’ (Moen, No. 4 at p. 

3; PMI, No. 8 at p. 4; PMI, Public 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 20835 

2For example, see Title 8 of the California Code 

of Regulations, Section 5162, Emergency Eyewash 

and Shower Equipment. 

Meeting Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 56–57; 

Kohler, No. 9, pp. 3–4; Sloan Valve, No. 

12 at p. 3) However, DOE believes that 

incorporating the phrase ‘‘and which is 

connected to a flexible hose’’ found in 

the ASME hand-held showerhead 

definition restricts the definition 

because it may not encompass all handheld showerhead configurations in the 

marketplace. Therefore, in this SNOPR, 

DOE proposes to define ‘‘hand-held 

showerhead’’ as follows: ‘‘A 

showerhead that can be hand-held or 

fixed in place for the purpose of 

spraying water onto a bather.’’ 

In addition, because DOE proposes to 

exclude body sprays from the current 

definition of showerhead, DOE proposes 

(as explained below) to revise its test 

procedure to clarify that body sprays 

that are components of ‘‘shower towers’’ 

should be turned off during testing to 

permit testing of the integral 

showerhead(s). For context, DOE 

generally understands that the term 

shower tower is typically used in 

reference to single supply fittings that 

are designed for attachment to one or 

more hot and cold water connections in 

a shower or bath and that are comprised 

of at least one showerhead and one or 

more body sprays, but that may also 

include a hand-held showerhead and 

either a valve for selecting spraying 

components, a thermostatic mixing 

valve, or both. 

DOE also seeks to clarify the 

treatment of other products that are 

components of a shower tower but are 

otherwise covered. Based upon the 

description in the previous paragraph, a 

shower tower would represent a 

combined system that delivers water to 

individual supply fittings downstream 

of a temperature mixing valve. If each 

covered spraying component is 

individually isolable from any other 

covered spraying component 

downstream of the mixing valve by a 

valve or other isolating device installed 

within the plumbing system and not 

within the spraying device itself, each 

spraying component represents an 

individual supply fitting that is covered 

separately. This is in contrast to a 

product that has multiple spraying 

components and is designed to be 

attached to a single supply fitting 

downstream of the mixing valve, such 

as the threaded overhead pipe in a 

shower. According to the definition of 

‘‘showerhead’’ proposed in this notice, 

such a product would be covered as a 

showerhead since it is designed to be 

attached to a single supply fitting. The 

product itself may contain a valve or 

other device to isolate its spraying 

components from each other, but since 

the spraying components and diverter 

device are distributed in commerce 

together for attachment as a composite 

unit to a supply fitting, the product is 

distinct from the plumbing system. In 

the case of the shower tower, the device 

that isolates one spraying component 

from one or more other spraying 

components is within the plumbing 

system, making the spraying 

components separate fittings. 

Finally, DOE notes that no definition 

currently exists in EPCA or in 10 CFR 

430.2 for the term ‘‘safety shower 

showerhead,’’ which is a type of 

showerhead specifically excluded from 

coverage by EPCA. 42 U.S.C. 

6291(31)(D). Because of this lack of a 

definition, confusion may exist as to 

which products qualify for exclusion 

from coverage. DOE notes that the 

current Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) regulation 

addressing safety showers, which is 

located at 29 CFR 1910.151(c), does not 

define the term or specify required 

characteristics of a safety shower 

showerhead. However, certain State 

regulatory requirements that address 

safety showers use as a reference 

American National Standards Institute 

(ANSI) Standard Z358.1, Emergency 

Eyewash and Shower Equipment.2 This 

standard contains specific design and 

performance criteria that safety showers 

must meet, such as flow rate and 

accessibility, which may enable the 

establishment of a common definition 

for the showerhead portion of a safety 

shower. DOE is interested in receiving 

comments on whether such a definition 

is needed, and if so, whether it is 

appropriate to define a safety shower 

showerhead as a showerhead that is 

designed to meet the requirements of 

ANSI Standard Z358.1, or if a more 

appropriate definition exists. 

DOE requests comments on these 

proposed changes to the definitions of 

showerhead and hand-held showerhead, 

its proposal not to include body sprays 

in the proposed showerhead definition, 

its proposal that body sprays that are 

components of shower towers be 

disabled during testing, and on the need 

for a definition of safety shower 

showerhead. 

2. Test Procedure for Showerhead Flow 

Control Insert 

EPCA includes a provision that 

showerheads must meet the 

requirements of section 7.4.3(a) of 

ASME A112.18.1M–1989, which 

requires that if a flow control insert is 

used as a component of a showerhead, 

the showerhead must be manufactured 

such that a pushing or pulling force of 

8 lbf or more is required to remove the 

flow control insert. (42 U.S.C. 6295(j)(1)) 

DOE subsequently adopted this 

provision in 10 CFR 430.32(p), and later 

updated that paragraph upon 

incorporation by reference of ASME 

A112.19.1M–1996 to reflect that it had 

been moved to section 7.4.4(a). This 

provision has been retained in the 

updated A112.18.1–2011, but has been 

moved from section 7.4.4(a) to section 

4.11.1. 

In the May 2012 NOPR, DOE did not 

propose to change this design 

requirement, but requested comments 

and information on prospective 

methods for verifying that the 

requirement in section 4.11.1 of ASME 

A112.18.1–2011 has been met, as well 

as comments and information on 

showerhead designs that may 

complicate verification of the force 

requirement or make verification 

unnecessary. 77 FR at 31747. 

Moen, PMI, Kohler, ICC, and Sloan 

Valve commented that DOE should not 

develop a standardized test for flow 

control insert retention to address the 

showerhead design requirement. These 

commenters noted that it would be 

difficult to design a standardized test 

that could accommodate different 

designs in the marketplace and that 

such a test could hinder innovation of 

new products and make showerhead 

repair difficult. (Moen, No. 4 at p. 2; 

PMI, No. 8 at p. 2; Kohler, No. 9 at p. 

3; Kohler, Public Meeting Transcript, 

No. 11 at p. 47; ICC, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 48–49; Sloan 

Valve, No. 12 at p. 2) In contrast, NRDC 

recommended that DOE develop a 

standardized test procedure to ensure 

that manufacturers produce 

showerheads with flow control inserts 

that are not easily removed. (NRDC, 

Public Meeting Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 

47–48) 

After receiving comments on this 

issue, DOE obtained 21 showerheads to 

investigate the design requirement for 

retention of the flow control insert. The 

selected showerheads included a variety 

of brands and styles. In general, there 

were four basic flow control designs: 

(1) Some showerheads contained a 

plastic disc insert, either with or 

without an o-ring in the middle of the 

insert; 

(2) Others contained a rubber disc 

insert; 

(3) Others did not have any flow 

control insert; instead, flow control was 

integral to the showerhead housing; and 

(4) One showerhead’s sealing gasket 

(i.e., the seal between the showerhead 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20836 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

3Four showerheads with plastic inserts were 

manufactured with the insert embedded very in 

tightly in the housing, making removal difficult 

enough that DOE deemed the test unnecessary for 

those products; six showerheads with integral flow 

control in the fixture housing were not tested; the 

showerhead with a sealing gasket as the flow 

control was not tested because it is exempt from the 

design requirement. 

and the supply fitting) also functioned 

as the flow control mechanism. 

Showerheads with integral flow 

control were found to automatically 

meet the design requirements per 

A112.18.1–2011, section 4.11.1 because 

these showerheads did not contain a 

flow control insert that could be 

removed. The showerheads that used a 

sealing gasket as the flow control 

mechanism were exempt from the 

design requirement because A112.18.1, 

section 4.11.1 states that the design 

requirement does not apply if 

significant leakage between the 

showerhead and supply fitting occurs as 

a result of the flow control insert being 

removed, and these products leak 

significantly from areas other than the 

spray face when used without the 

gasket. In this context, DOE interprets 

the term ‘‘leak significantly’’ to mean 

the visible emergence of water from 

parts of the showerhead other than the 

spray face or nozzle that does not occur 

when the flow control insert is installed, 

such as from the connection between 

the showerhead and the plumbing 

fitting. 

DOE then tested subsets of the 

remaining showerheads (i.e., those with 

plastic disc inserts and rubber disc 

inserts) using two different methods to 

determine the optimal method for 

determining whether the flow control 

insert could be removed using a pushing 

or pulling force of less than 8 pounds. 

a. Pulling-Force Test 

First, DOE conducted a pulling-force 

test, which involved the following 

general steps, on a subset 3 of the 

relevant showerheads: (1) Removing (a) 

the showerhead’s sealing gasket, which 

provides a seal between the showerhead 

and supply fitting, and (b) the screen 

upstream of the flow control insert; (2) 

securing the showerhead; (3) attaching a 

clamp to the flow control insert that 

could withstand a force of at least 20 lbf; 

(4) attaching a force transducer to the 

clamp, which was capable of measuring 

a maximum force of 25 lbf on the flow 

control insert; and (5) applying a 

consistent pulling force to the flow 

control insert for between 10 and 20 

seconds with the average pulling force 

recorded at 0.5 second intervals. 

Of the 10 showerheads subjected to 

the pulling-force test, three flow control 

inserts (two plastic disc flow control 

inserts and one rubber disc insert) were 

clearly removed with a pulling force of 

under 8 lbf, while two flow control 

inserts (both plastic disc inserts) were 

removed with a force close enough to 

the 8 lbf level that it was unclear 

whether the actual force required to 

remove the insert was more or less than 

8 lbf. Five showerheads that contained 

plastic disc flow control inserts were 

tested and the inserts could not be 

removed with a pulling force of 8 lbf. 

b. Gravity Test 

As a potential alternative to the 

pulling-force test, DOE developed a 

gravity test that simplifies the pullingforce test by using a calibrated 8 poundmass (lbm) to exert a constant 8 lbf on 

the flow control insert. This test, which 

is described in further detail in the 

section below, eliminates the 

requirement for a force transducer and 

data logger, limits cost burden, and 

ensures the test is easily repeatable. Of 

the 5 units subjected to this test, 2 failed 

and 3 passed; the results were not 

inconclusive for any of the units. 

c. Conclusions Based on DOE Testing 

DOE’s investigation and lessons 

learned from the preliminary testing 

described above showed that, with 

respect to flow control insert testing, 

there are three general categories of 

showerheads: (1) Showerheads that 

contain a flow control insert that is also 

the sealing gasket and are therefore 

exempt from the design requirement; (2) 

showerheads with a flow control device 

that is an integral feature of the housing 

and cannot be removed and are 

therefore exempt from the showerhead 

design requirement; and (3) 

showerheads containing a flow control 

insert where testing of the insert 

retention can be accomplished using a 

pulling-style test. DOE found no 

showerheads for which the flow control 

insert could be more easily removed 

using a pushing force rather than a 

pulling force. 

Thus, in this SNOPR, DOE proposes 

a simplified gravity pull-style test 

procedure that will allow DOE to 

validate the statutory flow control insert 

design requirement that is currently 

included in manufacturers’ certification 

reports. The proposed test method 

includes the following steps: (1) Remove 

the showerhead’s sealing gasket, which 

provides a seal between the showerhead 

and supply fitting, and the screen 

upstream of the flow control insert 

(however, if the sealing gasket also 

functions as the flow control insert and 

would cause visible leakage from areas 

other than the showerhead’s spray face 

if removed, then the showerhead would 

be exempted from the design 

requirement and no further testing 

would be necessary); (2) attach a clamp 

(or other grasping device) to the flow 

control insert such that a force of at least 

8 lbf can be applied without separating 

the clamp (or other device) from the 

flow control insert (if a clamp or other 

grasping device that would enable 

physical removal of the flow control 

insert cannot be attached, then the 

showerhead meets the design 

requirement and no further testing 

would be necessary); (3) secure the 

showerhead such that the visible face of 

the flow control insert is downward 

(e.g., the spraying face of the 

showerhead faces directly upward) and 

a force of at least 8 lbf will not cause 

the showerhead to move; (4) apply a 

pulling force using a combined 8 lbm 

(total combined weight includes clamp, 

connecting linkage, and hanging mass) 

secured to the clamp and lowered 

beneath the showerhead until the mass 

freely hangs such that a downward 8 lbf 

is exerted on the flow control insert; and 

(5) continue to apply the 8 lbf to the 

flow control insert for a minimum of 60 

seconds. The showerhead would be 

compliant with the design requirement 

if, after this period has elapsed, the flow 

control insert is completely retained in 

the showerhead housing with no 

movement. In this SNOPR, DOE 

proposes the use of this test method as 

a means to validate that showerheads 

meet the flow control insert design 

requirement for situations in which 

compliance with the requirement is in 

dispute. However, DOE is not proposing 

to mandate that this test method be 

conducted by manufacturers as part of 

an initial certification that a basic model 

of showerhead is in compliance with 

this requirement. 

DOE requests comments on the 

proposed test method for verifying the 

retention requirement for the 

showerhead flow control insert, 

specifically related to the practicality of 

the test method and any potential 

impacts on showerhead design. 

3. Test Procedure Amendment for 

Supply Fittings With Integral Body 

Sprays 

In light of DOE’s proposal to exclude 

body sprays from the definition of 

‘‘showerhead,’’ DOE also proposes to 

revise the showerhead test procedure 

located at Appendix S to subpart B of 

part 430 to include instructions for 

testing a single fitting that consists of at 

least one showerhead and at least one 

integral body spray (colloquially called 

a ‘‘shower tower’’). ASME A112.18.1, 

section 5.4.2.1 (part of section 5.4, Flow 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 20837 

Rate, which DOE proposed to 

incorporate by reference in the NOPR), 

provides that a ‘‘specimen’’ to be tested 

shall ‘‘have its standard accessories 

installed, when tested for compliance 

with the maximum flow rates.’’ Because 

DOE is not proposing to include body 

sprays in the definition of 

‘‘showerhead,’’ DOE proposes to clarify 

in Appendix S that the body spray 

portion of a ‘‘shower tower’’ should be 

turned off during testing. DOE also 

proposes to clarify in Appendix S that 

where the text of Appendix S conflicts 

with section 5.4, the text of Appendix 

S controls. 

4. Test Procedure Amendments for 

Gravity Flush Tank Water Closet Trim 

Adjustments 

In written comments submitted to 

DOE and in oral comments made during 

the public meeting, NRDC urged DOE to 

consider requiring manufacturers to 

adjust the tank trim components to the 

maximum flush volume setting during 

testing. (NRDC, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 11 at pp. 70–71; NRDC, 

No. 14 at p. 3) In this context, tank trim 

refers to the components in the tank that 

can be adjusted by the consumer such 

as the water level, fill valve timing, and 

related components. While DOE’s 

current test procedure does not address 

this issue, ASME A112.19.2–2008, 

section 7.1.2, specifies that for gravity 

flush tank water closets, water level in 

the tank and fill time shall be adjusted 

in accordance with the manufacturer’s 

instructions and specifications at each 

test pressure. Table 5 in ASME 

A112.19.2–2008 specifies that 

‘‘[a]djustments to tank trim components 

shall be permitted only when changes to 

test pressures are indicated’’ and that 

‘‘[n]o adjustments shall be allowed 

between tests employing like 

pressures.’’ These provisions ensure that 

once the trim is set to the 

manufacturer’s specifications, the water 

level and fill time adjustments remain 

the same for tests that use like 

pressures, which simulates how water 

closets are used in real world 

application. 

After receiving comments from NRDC, 

DOE investigated water closet 

manufacturers’ instructions on gravity 

flush tank trim adjustments. Based upon 

a review of installation instructions for 

representative models from eight 

separate manufacturers, DOE found that 

only one manufacturer did not include 

specific instructions regarding the 

adjustments made to the tank water 

level. Based on these findings, DOE 

believes it to be likely that the majority 

of manufacturers’ installation 

instruction manuals for gravity flush 

tank water closets specify the tank water 

level and also provide directions on 

adjusting the tank’s water level. 

However, DOE found that few 

manufacturers provide information on 

the recommended adjustment of other 

trim components, such as the flapper 

valve or fill valve. Section 7.1.2 of 

ASME A112.19.2–2008 only specifies 

adjustments made to the tank water 

level and fill time and does not specify 

adjustments made to other trim 

components such as the flapper valve. 

Taking into account the variety of water 

closet designs on the market, it is 

unclear whether the impact on flush 

volume of trim adjustments that are not 

specified in manufacturer’s instructions 

or in ASME A112.19.2–2008 is 

significant. 

Based on these findings, DOE 

proposes in this SNOPR to amend the 

test procedures for gravity flush tank 

toilets to require that, at each test 

pressure specified in Table 5 of ASME 

A112.19.2–2008, trim components of 

gravity flush tank water closets that can 

be adjusted to cause an increase in flush 

volume, including (but not limited to) 

the flapper valve, fill valve, and float, 

would be set in accordance with the 

printed installation instructions 

supplied by the manufacturer. For 

products with instructions that do not 

specify trim setting adjustments, DOE 

would require that these trim 

components be adjusted to the 

maximum water use setting so that the 

maximum flush volume is produced 

without causing the water closet to 

malfunction or leak. In this context, 

DOE interprets ‘‘malfunction or leak’’ to 

mean that the product is otherwise 

unable to meet the requirements of the 

ASME A112.19.2 standard for basic 

functionality. In addition, the water 

level in the tank would be set to the 

maximum level indicated in the printed 

installation instructions supplied by the 

manufacturer or the water line indicated 

on the tank itself, whichever is higher. 

If the product’s installation instructions 

or the water closet tank do not indicate 

a water level, DOE would require that 

the water level be adjusted to 1 ± 0.1 

inches below the top of the overflow 

tube or 1 ± 0.1 inches below the top rim 

of the water-containing vessel (for 

gravity flush tank water closets that do 

not contain an overflow tube) for each 

designated pressure specified in Table 5 

of ASME A112.19.2–2008. 

DOE requests comments on the 

proposed amendment to the gravity 

flush tank water closest test procedures, 

specifically with respect to the potential 

effects on flush volume of tank trim 

adjustments, any impact on water closet 

design that may occur due to the 

proposed amendments, including its 

interpretation of the term ‘‘malfunction 

or leak.’’ 

5. Static Test Pressure for Flushometer 

Valve Siphonic and Blowout Water 

Closets 

In written comments submitted to 

DOE, NRDC and the Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) 

recommended that DOE evaluate the 

effect of averaging test results that have 

been obtained at different test pressures 

of siphonic flushometer style water 

closets, which is the general method 

used in both the ASME A112.19.6–1995 

standard referenced in the DOE test 

procedure for water closets and in the 

newer ASME A112.19.2–2008 

procedure. (NRDC/ASAP, No. 14 at p. 2) 

NRDC/ASAP further suggested that DOE 

should require reporting of the higher 

water consumption value obtained by 

averaging three tests at 80 psi and 

averaging three tests at 35 psi for 

siphonic flushometer water closets and, 

at a minimum, should discard the 2 to 

1 weighting of test results at the lower 

pressure. (NRDC/ASAP, No. 14 at p. 2) 

Although not specifically mentioned by 

NRDC and ASAP in their comments, 

DOE also requires an additional low 

pressure test at 45 psi for blowout 

flushometer water closets that results in 

a 2 to 1 weighting of results. 

DOE agrees that use of the 2 to 1 ratio 

for averaging water consumption of 

flushometer valve siphonic and blowout 

water closets at the pressures currently 

indicated in Table 5 of ASME 

A112.19.2–2008 potentially could lead 

to results that are not representative 

across a range of pressures if DOE were 

to incorporate by reference this test 

method. Further, DOE notes that the 

weighting of two low pressure tests to 

one high pressure test presented in 

Table 5 of ASME A112.19.2–2008 

diverges from previous versions of the 

ASME test method because tank type 

water closets are tested at three distinct 

static pressures, as were flushometer 

water closets in the previous version of 

the standard. For these reasons, DOE 

proposes to amend 10 CFR part 430, 

appendix T, ‘‘Test Measurement,’’ to 

require that water consumption tests be 

conducted at two static pressures, with 

three tests at each pressure (i.e., six total 

tests, rather than nine). For flushometer 

valve water closets with a siphonic 

bowl, DOE proposes that the test 

pressures be 80 psi and 35 psi. For 

flushometer valve water closets with a 

blowout bowl, DOE proposes that the 

test pressures be 80 psi and 45 psi. 

According to this proposal, the test shall 

be run three times at each pressure as 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20838 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

4WaterSense is a voluntary partnership program 

administered by the EPA which, among other 

activities, promotes water conservation by 

providing certification and labeling for water 

consuming products, including water closets, that 

meet certain water conservation standards. Further 

information is available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

WaterSense/index.html. 

specified in section 7.4.3, ‘‘Procedure,’’ 

of ASME Standard A112.19.2–2008. 

DOE requests comments on the 

proposal to amend the number of 

required tests for flushometer valve 

siphonic and blowout bowl water 

closets to require three tests at each of 

two pressures rather than three tests at 

each of three pressures. 

6. Testing and Reporting of Dual-Flush 

Water Closets 

In the May 2012 NOPR, DOE 

proposed a test method to account for 

the reduced average water use of dualflush water closets, which are capable of 

being flushed in either a full volume 

flush mode or in a reduced volume 

mode. Under the proposed test 

procedure, the flush volume of the 

reduced flush would be measured using 

section 7.4 of ASME A112.19.2–2008 in 

the same manner as the full flush, and 

the average representative water use 

would be calculated using the 

composite average of two reduced 

flushes and one full flush. 77 FR at 

31746. This proposed method was based 

upon the test method used by the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

WaterSense program 4 for measuring the 

flush volume of dual-flush water closets 

and used a weighted average of the full 

and reduced flush volumes. However, 

DOE did not propose to make this test 

method the required means for testing 

dual-flush water closets for the purposes 

of certification in 10 CFR part 429. 

Rather, the intent in including this test 

method was to provide manufacturers 

with a potential means to evaluate the 

representative water use of these 

products under conditions of expected 

consumer use for the purposes of 

labeling and other representations. The 

test method required for certification 

would remain the standard full-flush 

volume test for products that do not 

have a dual-flush capability. 

DOE received several comments in 

response to the NOPR that opposed 

incorporation of the proposed test 

method for dual-flush products. 

Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE), 

Kohler, Moen, and Sloan Valve 

commented that because of DOE’s 

statutory authority, which addresses 

only the maximum water use of water 

closets, dual-flush water closets should 

only be tested in full-flush mode in 

accordance with ASME A112.19.2. 

(AWE, No. 13 at p.2; Kohler, No. 9 at pp. 

2–3; Moen, No. 4, p. 2; Sloan Valve, No. 

12, p. 2). Also, AWE, ICC, Kohler, 

Maximum Performance Testing (MaP), 

Moen, NRDC, and Sloan Valve stated 

that the weighted average approach was 

unproven and that the particular ratio 

required further evaluation to confirm 

its representativeness. (AWE, No. 13 at 

p. 2; ICC, Public Meeting Transcript No. 

11 at pp. 36–37; Kohler, No. 9 at pp. 2– 

3; MaP, No. 10 at pp. 3–4; Moen, No. 4 

p. 2; NRDC, No. 14 at pp. 3–4; Sloan 

Valve, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

11 at pp. 38–39) In addition, Kohler, 

Moen, and Sloan Valve stated that 

confusion in the marketplace might 

result if DOE were to issue a method 

different from the WaterSense method 

to determine the representative average 

flush volume for dual-flush water 

closets. (Kohler, No. 9 at pp. 2–3; Moen, 

No. 4 at p. 2; Sloan Valve, No. 12 at p. 

2) 

In response to these comments, DOE 

proposes in today’s notice not to 

include a dual-flush test method in 

appendix T of subpart B of 10 CFR part 

430 and instead to indicate specifically 

in section 429.30 of 10 CFR part 429 

that the flush volume to be reported to 

DOE in certifications of compliance for 

water closets is the full-flush volume. 

DOE will continue to evaluate the 

merits of a weighted average approach 

to measuring the representative water 

use of dual-flush products and may 

consider proposing a revised test 

method in a future rulemaking. DOE 

notes that 42 U.S.C. 6293(c) prohibits 

making representations with respect to 

the water use of a covered product 

unless such product has been tested in 

accordance with the DOE test procedure 

and the representation fairly discloses 

the results of such testing. 

B. Supplementary Plumbing 

Requirements 

1. Definition of a Basic Model for Water 

Closets and Urinals 

In the May 2012 NOPR, DOE 

proposed to retain the existing 

definition of a basic model as it applies 

to water closets and urinals, but 

emphasized that the manner in which 

individual models may be grouped 

together as basic models for purposes of 

reporting water consumption in 

accordance with 10 CFR 429.12 should 

be based on the maximum volume for a 

given bowl (or urinal body) and the 

valve with which it is designed to 

operate. 77 FR at 31748 (May 30, 2012). 

In other words, by certifying a given 

pairing of water closet bowl and valve 

(or tank) or urinal body and valve as a 

basic model under the existing 

certification and compliance framework, 

the manufacturer would be certifying 

that the pairing on which that basic 

model’s rating is based is the maximum 

flush volume that model of water closet 

or urinal body is designed to receive, 

and that it could not be paired with a 

flushing device or tank that would 

provide a higher flush volume and still 

function properly. 

During the July 2012 public meeting, 

NRDC commented that it remained 

unclear how DOE expects the valve/ 

bowl pairing combination to work in 

practice. NRDC pointed to DOE’s own 

NOPR language indicating that different 

valve and china combinations could 

result in different flush volumes. 

(NRDC, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

11 at pp. 60–61) In follow-up written 

comments submitted jointly, NRDC and 

ASAP stated that DOE’s explanation of 

the compliance certification in the 

NOPR failed to clarify how a fixture 

manufacturer can establish that its bowl 

cannot be paired with a flushing device 

that would provide a higher flush 

volume and still function properly. 

(NRDC/ASAP, No. 14 at p. 6) NRDC 

stated that because DOE is aware of the 

variability of flush volume based on the 

valve/bowl combination, it must find a 

way to verify that products shipped in 

commerce can reliably meet the 

standard. Finally, NRDC and ASAP 

suggested that DOE should consider 

expanding the definition of ‘‘tested 

combination’’ in 10 CFR 430.2 to 

include information specific to water 

closets and urinals, along with their 

associated flushing devices. (NRDC/ 

ASAP, No. 14 at p. 6) During the public 

meeting, NRDC and ASAP also inquired 

whether new valves shipped in 

commerce that are not paired with a 

bowl are covered products by DOE and 

require certification. (NRDC, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 11 at p. 62; 

ASAP, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 

11 at p. 64). 

Based on these comments, DOE 

further investigated the issues revolving 

around the basic model definition and 

certification of water closets and 

urinals. First, the definitions of a water 

closet and urinal per ASME A112.19.2 

and 10 CFR 430.2 state that these 

products are receiving vessels that, 

upon actuation, convey waste through a 

trap to a drainage system. The flushing 

device, such as a flushometer valve, is 

not considered a water closet or urinal, 

and therefore is not itself a covered 

product under DOE’s regulations. The 

water closet bowl or urinal body, which 

is covered by DOE regulations, is 

designed to receive a specified volume 

of water per flush provided by the 

flushometer valve. Under the current 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 20839 

general certification requirements in 10 

CFR 429.12 and product-specific 

sampling and reporting requirements in 

10 CFR 429.30 (429.31 for urinals), 

manufacturers of flushometer water 

closets (and urinals) must only certify 

the water closet bowl (or urinal body) 

based on data obtained from testing 

using the DOE test procedure, and are 

not required to report information on 

the flushometer valve that was paired 

with the fixtures during testing. 

However, a water closet bowl (or urinal) 

must be paired with a flushometer valve 

device to function properly. Without the 

valve, the water closet could not be 

actuated and could not convey waste 

into the drainage system, thus 

preventing it from meeting the DOE 

definition of a water closet. In addition, 

water closet bowls and urinals are 

designed for a specified flush volume, 

and thus must be paired with a valve 

that is designed to provide this specific 

volume. 

As a result of the comment made by 

NRDC, DOE re-examined ASME 

A112.19.2–2008 and determined that a 

provision related to the test setup for 

flushometer valves in section 7.1.5, 

which DOE had not proposed for 

incorporation by reference in the May 

2012 NOPR, partially addresses this 

issue. This section describes the steps to 

standardize the water supply system for 

testing water closets. Section 7.1.5.2, 

which covers standardization for 

flushometer water closets, clearly states 

that a flushometer valve must be 

connected to the test bowl and specifies 

that while conducting the water 

consumption test, the valve is required 

to maintain a peak flow rate. 

Incorporating this provision will ensure 

that a water closet is paired with a 

flushometer valve that produces the 

required maximum flush volume during 

the water consumption test. Therefore, 

to clarify the definition of basic model 

for flushometer water closets, DOE 

proposes to incorporate by reference 

section 7.1.5 of ASME A112.19.2–2008. 

Similar steps for standardizing the 

water supply for flushometer urinals are 

contained in section 8.2 of ASME 

A112.19.2–2008. DOE proposed to 

incorporate by reference this section of 

the ASME standard in the May 2012 

NOPR, and did not receive any 

comments opposing the proposal. 77 FR 

at 31745 (May 30, 2012). 

Further, DOE proposes changes to the 

certification requirements in 10 CFR 

429.30(b)(2) for water closets and 10 

CFR 429.31(b)(2) for urinals to require 

manufacturers to identify in their 

certification reports the flushometer 

valve that was used during the water 

consumption test. According to this 

proposal, the flushometer valve 

identified in the certification report 

must represent the flush volume of any 

other valve with the same flush volume 

rating. Manufacturers who wish to 

advertise flush volume ratings of highefficiency flushometer water closets and 

urinals would be able to do so as long 

as the rating is based upon a pairing of 

the model with a valve with which it is 

designed to operate, the product pairing 

has been tested in accordance with test 

methods in ASME A112.19.2–2008, and 

the certification reports properly 

identify the flushometer valve used 

during the water consumption test. 

DOE requests comments on this 

interpretation of the definition of a basic 

model of water closet and urinal and the 

associated proposed amendments to the 

certification requirements. 

2. Minor Editorial Changes 

In reviewing the certification 

requirements applicable to the products 

addressed in this proposed rule, DOE 

noted that the current reporting 

requirement for urinals in 10 CFR 

429.31(b)(2) requires reporting of water 

consumption for trough-type urinals in 

gpm. Since the Federal water 

consumption standard for urinals in 10 

CFR 430.32(r), including trough-type 

urinals, is expressed in units of gallons 

per flush (gpf), DOE believes that the 

appropriate units of measure for 

reporting water consumption of troughtype urinals also should be gallons per 

flush. Accordingly, DOE is proposing in 

this notice to amend the existing 

language of 10 CFR 429.31(b)(2) to 

reflect that the water consumption of 

trough-type urinals should be reported 

in gallons per flush. 

DOE also noted that the amendments 

to the certification requirements for 

showerheads proposed in the May 2012 

NOPR did not reflect the proposed 

change to the language of 10 CFR 

430.32(p). The proposed language there 

no longer references an ASME standard. 

Instead, it explains the design 

requirement. Therefore, the certification 

requirements for showerheads in 10 

CFR 429.29 should no longer reference 

any ASME standard, but should instead 

reference the requirements laid out in 

430.32(p). Accordingly, DOE is 

proposing to reference 430.32(p) in its 

certification requirements for 

showerheads. In addition, because the 

declaration that a showerhead meets the 

relevant design requirement is public 

information, DOE proposes to move this 

certification requirement into 

429.29(b)(2) rather than retaining it in a 

separate section, 429.29(b)(3). 

III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

The regulatory reviews for this 

proposed rule are identical to those 

conducted for the May 2012 NOPR. 

Please see the May 2012 NOPR for 

additional details. 77 FR at 31749– 

31752 (May 30, 2012). With respect to 

review under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), DOE is 

proposing a test method to validate that 

the showerhead flow control insert 

design requirement has been satisfied; 

however, the use of the test during 

certification is optional. Because 

manufacturers are not required to 

perform the proposed test to meet DOE’s 

certification requirements, DOE does 

not expect any additional testing burden 

or cost. Thus, DOE continues to 

tentatively conclude and certify that the 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Accordingly, DOE will transmit the 

certification and supporting statement 

of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration for review under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b). 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this proposed 

rule no later than the date provided in 

the DATES section of this proposed rule. 

Interested parties may submit comments 

using any of the methods described in 

the ADDRESSES section of this proposed 

rule. 

Submitting comments via 

regulations.gov. The regulations.gov 

Web page will require you to provide 

your name and contact information. 

Your contact information will be 

viewable to DOE Building Technologies 

staff only. Your contact information will 

not be publicly viewable except for your 

first and last names, organization name 

(if any), and submitter representative 

name (if any). If your comment is not 

processed properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment or in any documents 

attached to your comment. Any 

information that you do not want to be 

publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment or in any 

document attached to your comment. 

Persons viewing comments will see only 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20840 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

first and last names, organization 

names, correspondence containing 

comments, and any documents 

submitted with the comments. 

Do not submit to regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)). Comments submitted through 

regulations.gov cannot be claimed as 

CBI. Comments received through the 

Web site will waive any CBI claims for 

the information submitted. For 

information on submitting CBI, see the 

‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ 

section. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through regulations.gov before posting. 

Normally, comments will be posted 

within a few days of being submitted. 

However, if large volumes of comments 

are being processed simultaneously, 

your comment may not be viewable for 

up to several weeks. Please keep the 

comment tracking number that 

regulations.gov provides after you have 

successfully uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery, or mail. Comments and 

documents submitted via email, hand 

delivery, or mail also will be posted to 

regulations.gov. If you do not want your 

personal contact information to be 

publicly viewable, do not include it in 

your comment or any accompanying 

documents. Instead, provide your 

contact information on a cover letter. 

Include your first and last names, email 

address, telephone number, and 

optional mailing address. The cover 

letter will not be publicly viewable as 

long as it does not include any 

comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via mail or hand delivery, please 

provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It 

is not necessary to submit printed 

copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be 

accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are not 

secured, are written in English, and are 

free of any defects or viruses. 

Documents should not contain special 

characters or any form of encryption 

and, if possible, they should carry the 

electronic signature of the author. 

Campaign form letters. Please submit 

campaign form letters by the originating 

organization in batches of between 50 to 

500 form letters per PDF or as one form 

letter with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information. 

Any person submitting information that 

he or she believes to be confidential and 

exempt by law from public disclosure 

should submit via email, postal mail, or 

hand delivery two well-marked copies: 

one copy of the document marked 

confidential including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

non-confidential with the information 

believed to be confidential deleted. 

Submit these documents via email or on 

a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own 

determination about the confidential 

status of the information and treat it 

according to its determination. 10 CFR 

1004.11(e). 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluating requests to treat submitted 

information as confidential include: (1) 

A description of the items; (2) whether 

and why such items are customarily 

treated as confidential within the 

industry; (3) whether the information is 

generally known by 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) when 

such information might lose its 

confidential character due to the 

passage of time; and (7) why disclosure 

of the information would be contrary to 

the public interest. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

Although DOE welcomes comments 

on any aspect of this proposal, DOE is 

particularly interested in receiving 

comments and views of interested 

parties concerning the following issues: 

1. DOE requests comments on the 

proposed definitions of showerhead and 

hand-held showerhead, its proposal to 

remove body sprays from the proposed 

showerhead definition, its proposal that 

body sprays that are components of 

shower towers be disabled during 

testing, and on the need for a definition 

of safety shower showerhead. 

2. DOE requests comments on the 

proposed test method for verifying the 

retention requirement for the 

showerhead flow control insert, 

specifically related to the practicality of 

the test method and any potential 

impacts on showerhead design. 

3. DOE requests comments on the 

proposed amendment to the gravity 

flush tank water closet test procedure, 

specifically related to potential effects 

on flush volume of tank trim 

adjustments and any impact on water 

closet design resulting from the 

proposed amendments, including DOE’s 

interpretation of the term ‘‘malfunction 

or leak.’’ 

4. DOE requests comments on the 

proposal to amend the number of 

required tests for flushometer valve 

siphonic and blowout bowl water 

closets to require three tests at each of 

two pressures rather than three tests at 

each of three pressures. 

5. DOE requests comments on its 

interpretation of the definition of a basic 

model of water closet and urinal and the 

associated proposed amendments to the 

certification requirements. 

V. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects 

10 CFR Part 429 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Imports, Intergovernmental relations, 

Small businesses. 

10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Imports, Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Small 

businesses. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 2, 

2013. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE proposes to amend parts 

429 and 430 of chapter II of title 10 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations, as set 

forth below: 

PART 429—CERTIFICATION, 

COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 20841 

■ 2. Section 429.29 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(2) and removing 

paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 429.29 Showerheads. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a 

certification report shall include the 

following public product-specific 

information: The maximum water use in 

gallons per minute (gpm) rounded to the 

nearest 0.1 gpm, the maximum flow 

water pressure in pounds per square 

inch (psi), whether the showerhead is 

exempt from the requirements of 

§ 430.32(p) pertaining to mechanical 

retention of the flow-restricting insert, 

and a declaration that the showerhead 

meets the requirements of § 430.32(p) 

pertaining to mechanical retention of 

the flow-restricting insert, if applicable. 

■ 3. Section 429.30 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.30 Water closets. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a 

certification report shall include the 

following public product-specific 

information: The maximum water use in 

gallons per flush (gpf), rounded to the 

nearest 0.01 gallon. For flushometer 

water closets, the brand name and 

individual model number of the 

flushometer valve used during 

certification testing shall be included in 

the certification report. For dual-flush 

water closets, the maximum water use 

to be reported is the flush volume 

observed when tested in the full-flush 

mode. 

■ 4. Section 429.31 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.31 Urinals. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a 

certification report shall include the 

following public product-specific 

information: The maximum water use in 

gallons per flush (gpf), rounded to the 

nearest 0.01 gallon; and, for trough-type 

urinals, the maximum water use in 

gallons per flush (gpf), rounded to the 

nearest 0.01 gallon, and the length of the 

trough in inches (in). For flushometer 

urinals, the brand name and individual 

model number of the flushometer valve 

used during certification testing shall be 

included in the certification report. 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 6. Section 430.2 is amended by 

adding, in alphabetical order, a 

definition for ‘‘hand-held showerhead’’ 

and by revising the definition of 

‘‘showerhead’’ to read as follows: 

§ 430.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Hand-held showerhead means a 

showerhead that can be hand-held or 

fixed in place for the purpose of 

spraying water onto a bather. 

* * * * * 

Showerhead means a component of a 

supply fitting, or set of components 

distributed in commerce for attachment 

to a single supply fitting, for spraying 

water onto a bather, typically from an 

overhead position, including hand-held 

showerheads, but excluding safety 

shower showerheads. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Appendix S to subpart B of part 430 

is amended by adding a note after the 

heading, revising section 2.b, and 

adding section 3, to read as follows: 

Appendix S to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Water Consumption of Faucets and 

Showerheads 

Note: Any representation related to water 

consumption of showerheads or faucets made 

after [insert date 180 days after date of 

publication of faucets and showerheads test 

procedure final rule] must be made based 

upon results generated using this test 

procedure. Any representation related to 

water consumption of showerheads or 

faucets made between [insert date 30 days 

after date of publication of faucets and 

showerheads test procedure final rule] and 

[insert date 180 days after date of publication 

of faucets and showerheads test procedure 

final rule] must be based upon results 

generated either under this test procedure or 

upon the test procedure as it appeared at 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix S, in the 

10 CFR parts 200 to 499 edition revised as 

of January 1, 2012. 

* * * * * 

2. * * * 

* * * * * 

b. Showerheads—The test procedures to 

measure the water flow rate for showerheads, 

expressed in gallons per minute (gpm) or 

liters per minute (L/min), shall be conducted 

in accordance with the test requirements 

specified in section 5.4, Flow Rate, of the 

ASME/ANSI Standard A112.18.1 

(incorporated by reference, see § 430.3). 

Measurements shall be recorded at the 

resolution of the test instrumentation. 

Calculations shall be rounded off to the same 

number of significant digits as the previous 

step. The final water consumption value of 

each tested unit shall be rounded to one 

decimal place. For showerheads or 

showerhead assemblies that are a component 

of a single supply fitting with integral body 

sprays, the body spray(s) shall be disabled for 

the test. 

3. Showerhead Flow Control Insert Test. 

The following test method is for 

verification of compliance with the 

requirements of 10 CFR 430.32(p) pertaining 

to retention of showerhead flow control 

inserts. This test is not required for 

certification under 10 CFR 429.12 but may be 

used to verify compliance with those 

requirements. 

(a) General provisions: 

(1) If removal of the flow control insert 

would cause significant leakage between the 

showerhead and the supply fitting, the 

showerhead is exempt from the flow control 

insert design requirement. 

(2) If the means of controlling flow rate is 

not physically removable, the showerhead is 

exempt from the flow control insert design 

requirement. 

(b) Test method: 

If items in section (3)(a) of this appendix 

do not apply, perform the following steps: 

(1) Remove the showerhead’s sealing 

gasket, which provides a seal between the 

showerhead and supply fitting, and the 

screen upstream of the flow control insert (if 

present). 

(2) Attach a clamp (or other grasping 

device) to the flow control insert such that 

a force of at least 8 lbf can be applied without 

separating the clamp (or other grasping 

device) from the flow control insert. 

(3) Secure the showerhead such that the 

visible face of the flow control insert is 

directly downward and a force of at least 8 

lbf will not cause the showerhead to move. 

(4) Apply a pulling force using a combined 

8 pound-mass (lbm) (± 0.4 lbm) (total 

combined weight including clamp, 

connecting linkage, and hanging mass) 

secured to the clamp and lowered beneath 

the showerhead at a rate of no more than 1 

inch per second until the mass freely hangs 

such that a downward 8 lbf is exerted on the 

flow control insert. 

(5) Continue to apply the 8 lbf to the flow 

control insert for a minimum of 60 seconds. 

(c) Determination: 

If the flow control insert is retained in the 

showerhead after performing sections 

(3)(b)(1) through (5) of this appendix, the 

showerhead complies with the design 

requirement. 

■ 8. Appendix T to subpart B of part 430 

is amended by adding a note after the 

heading and revising sections 2 and 3, 

to read as follows: 

Appendix T to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Water Consumption of Water Closets 

and Urinals 

Note: Any representation related to water 

consumption of water closets or urinals made 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20842 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 67 / Monday, April 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

after [insert date 180 days after date of 

publication of faucets and showerheads test 

procedure final rule] must be made based 

upon results generated using this test 

procedure. Any representation related to 

water consumption of water closets or urinals 

made between [insert date 30 days after date 

of publication of water closets and urinals 

test procedure final rule] and [insert date 180 

days after date of publication of water closets 

and urinals test procedure final rule] must be 

based upon results generated either under 

this test procedure or upon the test procedure 

as it appeared at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix T, as contained in the 10 CFR parts 

200 to 499 edition revised as of January 1, 

2012. 

* * * * * 

2. Test Apparatus and General Instructions 

a. The test apparatus and instructions for 

testing water closets shall conform to the 

requirements specified in section 7.1, 

‘‘General,’’ in sections 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.3, 

7.1.4, and 7.1.5 of ASME A112.19.2 

(incorporated by reference, see § 430.3). 

Measurements shall be recorded at the 

resolution of the test instrumentation. 

Calculations of water consumption for each 

tested unit shall be rounded off to the same 

number of significant digits as the previous 

step. 

b. The test apparatus and instructions for 

testing urinals shall conform to the 

requirements specified in section 8.2, ‘‘Test 

Apparatus and General Instructions,’’ of 

ASME A112.19.2–2008 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 430.3). Measurements shall 

be recorded at the resolution of the test 

instrumentation. Calculations of water 

consumption for each tested unit shall be 

rounded off to the same number of significant 

digits as the previous step. 

3. Test Measurement 

a. Water closets: 

(i) Measurement of water flush volume: 

The measurement of the water flush volume 

for water closets, expressed in gallons per 

flush (gpf) or liters per flush (Lpf), shall be 

conducted in accordance with the test 

requirements specified in section 7.4, ‘‘Water 

Consumption Test,’’ of ASME A112.19.2 

(incorporated by reference, see § 430.3). 

(ii) Static pressure requirements: The water 

consumption tests of siphonic and blowout 

water closets shall be conducted at two static 

pressures. For flushometer valve water 

closets with a siphonic bowl, the test 

pressures shall be 80 psi and 35 psi. For 

flushometer valve water closets with a 

blowout bowl, the test pressures shall be 80 

psi and 45 psi. The test shall be run three 

times at each pressure as specified in section 

7.4.3, ‘‘Procedure,’’ of ASME A112.19.2 

(incorporated by reference, see § 430.3). 

(iii) Flush volume and tank trim 

component adjustments: For gravity flush 

tank water closets, trim components that can 

be adjusted to cause an increase in flush 

volume, including (but not limited to) the 

flapper valve, fill valve, and float, shall be set 

in accordance with the printed installation 

instructions supplied by the manufacturer. If 

the installation instructions for the model to 

be tested do not specify trim setting 

adjustments, these trim components shall be 

adjusted to the maximum water use setting 

so that the maximum flush volume is 

produced without causing the water closet to 

malfunction or leak. The water level in the 

tank shall be set to the maximum water line 

designated in the printed installation 

instructions supplied by the manufacturer or 

the designated water line on the tank itself, 

whichever is higher. If the printed 

installation instructions or the water closet 

tank do not indicate a water level, the water 

level shall be adjusted to 1 ± 0.1 inches 

below the top of the overflow tube or 1 ± 0.1 

inches below the top rim of the water 

containing vessel (for gravity flush tank water 

closets that do not contain an overflow tube) 

for each designated pressure specified in 

Table 5 of ASME A112.19.2 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 430.3). 

[FR Doc. 2013–08073 Filed 4–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket Number EERE–2013–BT–STD– 

0020] 

RIN 1904–AC98 

Energy Conservation Program: Energy 

Conservation Standards for 

Residential Clothes Dryers and Room 

Air Conditioners 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

correct the energy conservation 

standards for room air conditioners. In 

the direct final rule establishing 

amended energy conservation standards 

for residential clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners, published in the 

Federal Register on April 21, 2011, and 

the subsequent notices of effective date 

and compliance dates for the direct final 

rule and amendment of compliance 

dates, published on August 24, 2011, 

the Department of Energy (DOE) 

erroneously specified the maximum 

cooling capacity for product class 5a for 

room air conditioners without reverse 

cycle and with louvered sides as 24,999 

British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), 

and the minimum cooling capacity for 

product class 5b for room air 

conditioners without reverse cycle and 

with louvered sides as 25,000 Btu/h, 

rather than 27,999 Btu/h and 28,000 

Btu/h, respectively. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information regarding the proposed 

standards no later than May 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted 

must identify the proposed rule for 

Energy Conservation Standards for 

Residential Clothes Dryers and Room 

Air Conditioners, and provide docket 

number EERE–2013–BT–STD–0020 

and/or regulatory information number 

(RIN) number 1904–AC98. Comments 

may be submitted using any of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: 

DFRCorrRCDRAC@ee.doe.gov. Include 

the docket number and/or RIN in the 

subject line of the message. 

3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

CD. It is not necessary to include 

printed copies. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 586–2945. If possible, please 

submit all items on a CD. It is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

Docket: The docket for this 

rulemaking is available for review at 

www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2013-BT-STD0020. The docket for the direct final rule 

establishing the standards for room air 

conditioners is also available for review 

at regulations.gov, including Federal 

Register notices, framework documents, 

public meeting attendee lists and 

transcripts, comments, and other 

supporting documents/materials. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the regulations.gov index. Not all 

documents listed in the index may be 

publicly available, such as information 

that is exempt from public disclosure. 

For further information on how to 

submit or review public comments, 

contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 

586–2945 or email: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Witkowski, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–7463. Email: 

Stephen.Witkowski@ee.doe.gov. 

Elizabeth Kohl, Esq., U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–7796. Email: 

Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS