Vol. 79 Friday, 

No. 201 October 17, 2014 

Part II 

Department of Energy 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for 

Ceiling Fans; Proposed Rule 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62522 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–TP–0050] 

RIN 1904–AD10 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Test Procedure 

for Ceiling Fans 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

and announcement of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) proposes to reinterpret the 

statutory definition of a ceiling fan to 

include hugger ceiling fans and to 

amend its test procedure for ceiling fans 

established under the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act. The proposed test 

procedure would establish an integrated 

efficiency metric for ceiling fans, based 

on the airflow and power consumption 

at low and high speed for low-volume 

ceiling fans, and at high speed for highvolume ceiling fans (where volume 

refers to airflow volume). The proposed 

efficiency metric would also account for 

power consumed in standby mode. The 

proposed test procedure amendments 

also include new test methods for highvolume ceiling fans, multi-mount 

ceiling fans, ceiling fans with multiple 

fan heads, and ceiling fans where the 

airflow is not directed vertically, as well 

as power consumption in standby mode. 

In addition, the proposed test procedure 

would: Clarify that only high and low 

speeds are to be tested for low-volume 

ceiling fans; eliminate the requirement 

to test with a test cylinder; add a false 

ceiling; clarify the distance between the 

ceiling fan blades and the air velocity 

sensors during testing; clarify the fan 

configuration during testing for lowvolume ceiling fans; clarify the test 

method for ceiling fans with heaters; 

and revise the allowable tolerance for 

air velocity sensors. DOE is also 

announcing a public meeting to discuss 

and receive comments on issues 

presented in this test procedure 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Meeting: DOE will hold a public 

meeting on Wednesday, November 19, 

from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., in Washington, 

DC. The meeting will also be broadcast 

as a webinar. See section V, ‘‘Public 

Participation,’’ for webinar registration 

information, participant instructions, 

and information about the capabilities 

available to webinar participants. 

Comments: DOE will accept 

comments, data, and information 

regarding this notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NOPR) before and after the 

public meeting, but no later than 

December 31, 2014. See section V, 

‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. 

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be 

held at the U.S. Department of Energy, 

Forrestal Building, Room 6E–069, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. To attend, 

please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at 

(202) 586–2945. Please note that foreign 

nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are 

subject to advance security screening 

procedures. Any foreign national 

wishing to participate in the meeting 

should advise DOE as soon as possible 

by contacting Ms. Edwards to initiate 

the necessary procedures. Please also 

note that any person wishing to bring a 

laptop into the Forrestal Building will 

be required to obtain a property pass. 

Visitors should avoid bringing laptops, 

or allow an extra 45 minutes. Persons 

may also attend the public meeting via 

webinar. For more information, refer to 

section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ near 

the end of this notice. 

Interested persons are encouraged to 

submit comments using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Alternatively, interested persons may 

submit comments, identified by docket 

number EERE–2013–BT–TP–0050 and/ 

or regulatory information number (RIN) 

number 1904–AD10, by any of the 

following methods: 

1. Email: CF2013TP0050@ee.doe.gov. 

Include the docket number EERE–2013– 

BT–TP–0050 and/or RIN 1904–AD10 in 

the subject line of the message. Submit 

electronic comments in WordPerfect, 

Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file 

format, and avoid the use of special 

characters or any form of encryption. 

2. Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

compact disc (CD), in which case it is 

not necessary to include printed copies. 

3. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Office, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 586–2945. If possible, please 

submit all items on a CD, in which case 

it is not necessary to include printed 

copies. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number and/or RIN for this 

rulemaking. No telefacsimilies (faxes) 

will be accepted. For detailed 

instructions on submitting comments 

and additional information on the 

rulemaking process, see section V of this 

document (Public Participation). 

Docket: The docket, which includes 

Federal Register notices, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials, is available for 

review at www.regulations.gov. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

However, not all documents listed in 

the index may be publicly available, 

such as information that is exempt from 

public disclosure. 

A link to the docket Web page can be 

found at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ 

buildings/appliance;_standards/

rulemaking.aspx/ruleid/65. This Web 

page contains a link to the docket for 

this notice on the www.regulations.gov 

site. The www.regulations.gov Web page 

contains simple instructions on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See section V, 

‘‘Public Participation,’’ for information 

on how to submit comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment, review other public 

comments and the docket, or participate 

in the public meeting, contact Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by 

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1604. Email: 

ceiling_fans@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC, 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–7796. Email: 

elizabeth.kohl@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Authority and Background 

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope of Applicability 

B. Effective Date and Compliance Date 

C. Existing Test Procedure 

D. Proposed Metric 

E. Other Proposed Modifications to Current 

Test Procedure 

F. Proposed Additional Test Methods 

G. Certification and Enforcement 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62523 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

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

2All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the American 

Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act 

(AEMTCA), Public Law 112–210 (Dec. 18, 2012). 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 

V. Public Participation 

A. Attendance at the Public Meeting 

B. Procedure for Submitting Requests To 

Speak and Prepared General Statements 

for Distribution 

C. Conduct of the Public Meeting 

D. Submission of Comments 

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Authority and Background 

Title III, Part B1 of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (‘‘EPCA’’ 

or ‘‘the Act’’), Public Law 94–163 (42 

U.S.C. 6291–6309, as codified) sets forth 

a variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency and 

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles.2 These include 

ceiling fans, the subject of this proposed 

rulemaking. (42 U.S.C. 6291(49), 

6293(b)(16)(A)(i), and 6295(ff)) 

Under EPCA, this energy conservation 

program consists essentially of four 

parts: (1) Testing; (2) labeling; (3) 

Federal energy conservation standards; 

and (4) certification and enforcement 

procedures. The testing requirements 

consist of test procedures that 

manufacturers of covered products must 

use as the basis for certifying to DOE 

that their products comply with the 

applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted pursuant to EPCA 

and for making other representations 

about the efficiency of those products. 

(42 U.S.C. 6293(c) and 6295(s)) 

Similarly, DOE must use these test 

requirements to determine whether the 

products comply with any relevant 

standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(s)) 

A. General Test Procedure Rulemaking 

Process 

Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth 

the criteria and procedures that DOE 

must follow when prescribing or 

amending test procedures for covered 

products, including ceiling fans. EPCA 

provides that any test procedures 

prescribed or amended under this 

section shall be reasonably designed to 

produce test results which measure 

energy efficiency, energy use, or 

estimated annual operating cost of a 

covered product during a representative 

average use cycle or period of use, and 

must 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 a test procedure, DOE must 

determine to what extent, if any, the 

proposed test procedure would alter the 

measured energy efficiency of any 

covered product as determined under 

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

6293(e)) 

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(EPACT 2005), Public Law 109–58, 

amended EPCA and established energy 

conservation standards for ceiling fans, 

as well as requirements for the ceiling 

fan test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(ff) 

and 6293(b)(16)(A)(1)) Specifically, 

these amendments required that test 

procedures for ceiling fans be based on 

the ‘‘Energy Star Testing Facility 

Guidance Manual: Building a Testing 

Facility and Performing the Solid State 

Test Method for ENERGY STAR 

Qualified Ceiling Fans, Version 1.1.’’ Id. 

The current DOE ceiling fan test 

procedure, based on that source, was 

published in a 2006 final rule (71 FR 

71341 (Dec. 8, 2006)), which codified 

the test procedure in DOE’s regulations 

in the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) at 10 CFR 430.23(w) and 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix U, 

‘‘Uniform Test Method for Measuring 

the Energy Consumption of Ceiling 

Fans.’’ 

The Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public 

Law 110–140, amended EPCA to require 

that at least once every 7 years, DOE 

must conduct an evaluation of the test 

procedures for all covered products and 

either amend the test procedures (if the 

Secretary determines that amended test 

procedures would more accurately or 

fully comply with the requirements of 

42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) or publish a 

determination in the Federal Register 

not to amend them. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)(1)(A)) Pursuant to this 

requirement, DOE must review the test 

procedures for ceiling fans not later than 

December 19, 2014 (i.e., 7 years after the 

enactment of EISA 2007). Thus, the final 

rule resulting from this rulemaking will 

satisfy the requirement to review the 

test procedures for ceiling fans within 7 

years of the enactment of EISA 2007. 

In addition, for covered products with 

test procedures that do not fully account 

for standby-mode and off-mode energy 

consumption, EISA 2007 directs DOE to 

amend its test procedures to do so with 

such energy consumption integrated 

into the overall energy efficiency, 

energy consumption, or other energy 

descriptor, if technically feasible. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) If an integrated 

test procedure is technically infeasible, 

DOE must prescribe a separate standbymode and off-mode test procedure for 

the covered product, if technically 

feasible. Id. The current DOE ceiling fan 

test procedure, published in a 2006 final 

rule (71 FR 71341 (Dec. 8, 2006)), did 

not address standby mode or off mode. 

This test procedure rulemaking fulfills 

the statutory requirement to address 

standby-mode and off-mode power 

consumption. 

B. Concurrent Standards Rulemaking 

DOE is concurrently conducting an 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking for ceiling fans. On March 

15, 2013, DOE published in the Federal 

Register a Notice of Public Meeting and 

Availability of the Framework 

Document to initiate the energy 

conservation standard rulemaking for 

ceiling fans. (78 FR 16443 (Mar. 15, 

2013)). DOE held the framework public 

meeting on March 22, 2013. DOE 

requested feedback in the framework 

document and received both written 

comments and comments at the public 

meeting from interested parties on many 

issues related to test methods for 

evaluating the airflow and electrical 

consumption performance of ceiling 

fans. Comments related to the test 

procedure for ceiling fans are addressed 

throughout this notice. 

DOE invites comments on all aspects 

of the existing test procedures for 

ceiling fans. 

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

In this NOPR, DOE proposes to 

reinterpret the statutory definition of a 

ceiling fan to include hugger ceiling 

fans and to amend the current test 

procedure for ceiling fans as follows: 

(1) Specify an efficiency metric; 

(2) Clarify that low-volume ceiling 

fans should be tested at low and high 

speeds; 

(3) Eliminate the requirement to use a 

test cylinder; 

(4) Add a false ceiling to the 

experimental setup for low-volume 

ceiling fans; 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62524 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

3Air Movement and Control Association 

International, Inc. ANSI/AMCA Standard 230–12: 

Laboratory Methods of Testing Air Circulating Fans 

for Rating and Certification. 2010. Arlington 

Heights, IL. (Last accessed February 24, 2014) 

https://www.amca.org/store/item.aspx?ItemId=37. 

(5) Clarify the required distance 

between the ceiling fan blades and the 

air velocity sensors; 

(6) Clarify the appropriate fan 

configuration during testing for lowvolume ceiling fans; 

(7) Clarify the test method for ceiling 

fans with heaters; 

(8) Revise the allowable tolerance for 

air velocity sensors used during testing; 

(9) Add a test method for high-volume 

ceiling fans; 

(10) Add a test method for multimount ceiling fans; 

(11) Add a test method for multiheaded ceiling fans; 

(12) Add a test method for ceiling fans 

where the airflow is not directed 

vertically; and 

(13) Add a test method for power 

consumption in standby mode. 

The following paragraphs summarize 

these proposed changes, with further 

detail provided in section III 

(Discussion). 

Establishment of an Efficiency Metric 

In general, DOE proposes to establish 

the metric for ceiling fan efficiency 

based on measured air flow and energy 

consumption. For low-volume ceiling 

fans (where volume refers airflow 

volume), ceiling fan efficiency would be 

determined based on the weighted 

average of airflow and power 

consumption at high and low speeds. 

For high-volume ceiling fans, ceiling fan 

efficiency would be determined based 

on airflow and power consumption at 

high speed only. (See section III.A.2 for 

definitions of ‘‘low-volume ceiling fan’’ 

and ‘‘high-volume ceiling fan’’.) The 

metric for ceiling fan efficiency would 

also include any power consumption in 

standby mode. Because DOE’s research 

suggests that there is no off-mode power 

consumption for ceiling fans, DOE is not 

proposing to include off-mode power in 

the efficiency metric, or to require offmode testing. 

Clarification That Low-Volume Ceiling 

Fans Are To Be Tested At High and Low 

Fan Speeds 

As noted in the previous paragraph, 

DOE proposes to clarify that testing is 

required at high and low speeds for lowvolume ceiling fans. For high-volume 

ceiling fans, where the available fan 

speeds are often continuous instead of 

discrete, DOE proposes to test only at 

high speed. 

Elimination of the Requirement for a 

Test Cylinder To Be Used During 

Testing 

DOE proposes to eliminate the 

requirement to use a test cylinder while 

conducting airflow measurements. The 

positioning of the ceiling fan and the air 

velocity sensors would remain the same 

as in the current test procedure but 

without a test cylinder between them. 

The same effective area and number of 

sensors as in the current test procedure 

would be used to calculate the airflow 

of a low-volume ceiling fan. 

Addition of a False Ceiling to the 

Experimental Setup 

For all low-volume ceiling fans, DOE 

proposes to add a test set-up 

requirement for a false ceiling directly 

above the ceiling fan during testing. 

This is intended to simulate real life 

usage conditions more accurately and 

provide an equitable basis of 

comparison across low-volume ceiling 

fans. The length and breadth of the false 

ceiling would be required to be at least 

8 inches larger than the blade span of 

the ceiling fan being tested. 

Clarification of the Distance Between 

the Ceiling Fan Blades and the Air 

Velocity Sensors 

DOE proposes to modify its 

instructions for determining the 

appropriate vertical position of a low 

volume ceiling fan in relation to the air 

velocity sensors. More specifically, DOE 

proposes that such position be 

determined at the lowest point on the 

ceiling fan blades (i.e., the point on the 

ceiling fan blade that is farthest from the 

ceiling), rather than ‘‘the middle of the 

fan blade tips’’, as is currently required. 

DOE is proposing this change because it 

may be unclear how the ‘‘middle of 

blade tip’’ measurement should be made 

for ceiling fans having non-flat or 

unusually shaped blades. 

Clarification of the Appropriate Fan 

Configuration During Testing for LowVolume Ceiling Fans 

DOE proposes to clarify that if more 

than one mounting option is included 

with a fan that would meet the 

definition of a standard low-volume 

ceiling fan, that ceiling fan should be 

tested in the configuration with the 

smallest distance between the ceiling 

and the lowest part of the fan blades. 

Similarly, if more than one mounting 

option is included with a fan that would 

meet the definition of a hugger lowvolume ceiling fan, that ceiling fan 

should be tested in the configuration 

with the smallest distance between the 

ceiling and the lowest part of the fan 

blades. DOE seeks comment and data on 

how these fans are configured in the 

field. 

Clarification of the Test Method for 

Ceiling Fans With Heaters 

DOE proposes to clarify that ceiling 

fans with heaters integrated into or sold 

packaged with the fan should be tested 

with the heater installed but turned off 

during testing. 

Revision of the Allowable Tolerance for 

Air Velocity Sensors Used During 

Testing 

DOE proposes to revise the allowable 

accuracy tolerance for air velocity 

sensors used during testing of lowvolume ceiling fans from ±1 percent to 

±5 percent, based on testing results that 

indicate that the accuracy of the airflow 

measurement is not affected by this 

difference in tolerance. 

Addition of a Test Method for HighVolume Ceiling Fans 

DOE proposes to base the test method 

for high-volume ceiling fans on ANSI/ 

AMCA Standard 230–12, ‘‘Laboratory 

Methods of Testing Air Circulating Fans 

for Rating and Certification’’ (AMCA 

230 3), with some modifications to the 

specified room dimensions to allow for 

testing of ceiling fans up to 24 feet in 

diameter. 

Addition of a Test Method for MultiMount Ceiling Fans 

DOE proposes to test low-volume 

multi-mount ceiling fans in two 

configurations: (1) In the standard 

configuration that minimizes the 

distance between the ceiling and the 

lowest part of the fan blades, and (2) in 

the hugger configuration that minimizes 

the distance between the ceiling and the 

lowest part of the fan blades. 

Addition of a Test Method for MultiHeaded Ceiling Fans 

DOE proposes to test low-volume, 

multi-headed ceiling fans by positioning 

the fan such that one fan head is 

centered in the test set-up and then 

testing that head in the same manner as 

all other low-volume ceiling fans. If the 

ceiling fan includes more than one type 

of ceiling fan head, then at least one of 

each unique type should be tested. The 

airflow for the ceiling fan at a given 

speed can be determined by multiplying 

the airflow of a measured fan head by 

the number of ceiling fan heads of that 

type and summing over all types 

included in the ceiling fan. The power 

consumption at a given speed should be 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62525 

3

4Hereafter, all ALA comments from EERE–2012– 

BT–STD–0045–0039 reference the powerpoint 

presentation included in that docket number, 

unless otherwise noted. 

5The EPCA definition of a consumer product 

includes products of a type that, to any significant 

extent, are distributed in commerce for personal 

use, without regard to whether a particular article 

is in fact distributed in commerce for personal use. 

42 U.S.C. 6291(1) Therefore, any product that meets 

the definition of a ceiling fan, even those fans used 

in non-residential applications, are considered 

covered products for which DOE can establish a test 

procedure. 

measured separately, with all ceiling fan 

heads turned on. 

Addition of a Test Method for Ceiling 

Fans Where the Airflow Is Not Directed 

Vertically 

For low-volume ceiling fans where 

the airflow is not directed vertically, 

DOE proposes to clarify that the ceiling 

fan head should be adjusted such that 

the airflow is directed as vertically 

downward as possible prior to testing. If 

the airflow is still not vertical, the air 

velocity results from an offset series of 

sensors would be substituted for the 

typical symmetric set to calculate total 

airflow. 

Addition of a Test Method for Power 

Consumption in Standby Mode 

DOE proposes to add a test method for 

measuring the power consumption of 

ceiling fans in standby mode. This test 

method would be applicable to both low 

and high-volume ceiling fans. 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope of Applicability 

The test procedures described in this 

notice are proposed to apply to all 

ceiling fans. According to the statutory 

definition, a ‘‘ceiling fan’’ is ‘‘a nonportable device that is suspended from 

a ceiling for circulating air via the 

rotation of fan blades.’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6291(49)) This includes ceiling fans for 

all applications, including applications 

where large airflow volume may be 

needed. The test procedures do not 

apply to air circulators (or aircirculating fan heads) that are typically 

mounted on a pedestal but could also 

include wall, ceiling, or I-beam 

mounting brackets. Such air-circulating 

fan heads are defined in section 5.1.1 of 

AMCA 230.3

1. Clarification of the Statutory 

Definition of a Ceiling Fan 

DOE previously interpreted the 

definition of a ceiling fan such that it 

excluded certain types of ceiling fans 

commonly referred to as hugger fans. 71 

FR 71343 (Dec. 8, 2006). Hugger ceiling 

fans are typically understood to be set 

flush to the ceiling (e.g., mounted 

without a downrod). The previous 

interpretation exempted hugger fans 

from standards on the basis that they are 

set flush to the ceiling. DOE has 

reconsidered the validity of this 

distinction and is proposing a 

determination that ‘‘suspended from the 

ceiling’’ does not depend upon whether 

the unit is mounted with a downrod. 

The concept of suspension does not 

require any length between the object 

and the point of support. This 

interpretation more accurately reflects 

the statutory definition and does not 

draw an artificial distinction between 

units that serve the same functional 

purpose. This is also in line with the 

scope of CAN/CSA–C814–10, which 

includes hugger fans. 

Hugger fans generally are 

indistinguishable from other types of 

ceiling fans in that they move air via 

rotation of fan blades, are intended to 

improve comfort, and are rated on their 

ability to move air (as measured in cubic 

feet per minute). Under this 

reinterpretation, a multi-mount ceiling 

fan, i.e., a ceiling fan which can be 

mounted in both the hugger and 

standard ceiling fan configurations, 

would also fall under the definition of 

a ceiling fan. In response to the 

Framework Document for the ceiling fan 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking, several commenters, 

including the American Lighting 

Association (ALA), the Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), 

the National Consumer Law Center 

(NCLC), the National Resources Defense 

Council (NRDC), and the Northwest 

Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) 

supported DOE’s proposed 

reinterpretation. (ALA, No. 39 4 at p. 3; 

ASAP–NCLC–NEEA–NRDC, No. 14 at p. 

4) DOE received no comments objecting 

to its proposed reinterpretation. DOE 

proposes that any ceiling fan sold with 

the option of being mounted in either a 

hugger configuration or a standard 

configuration would also be included 

within the ‘‘ceiling fan’’ definition. 

Under DOE’s proposed 

reinterpretation, DOE would consider 

the following fans to be explicitly 

covered under the definition of ‘‘ceiling 

fan’’ in 10 CFR 430.2: 

1. Fans suspended from the ceiling using 

a downrod or other means of suspension 

such that the fan is not mounted directly to 

the ceiling; 

2. Fans suspended such that they are 

mounted directly or close to the ceiling; and 

3. Fans sold with the option of being 

suspended with or without a downrod. 

In the Framework Document for the 

ceiling fan energy conservation 

standards rulemaking, DOE considered 

interpreting ceiling fans without 

external blades as meeting the statutory 

definition of a ceiling fan and asked for 

comment on this issue. (78 FR 16443 

(Mar. 15, 2013)) ALA agreed that the 

definition of ‘‘ceiling fan’’ may cover 

ceiling fans without external blades, but 

ALA advised DOE to delay including 

these fans in this rulemaking until new 

test procedures are developed to 

appropriately test the performance of 

these fans. (ALA, No. 39 at p. 3) At this 

time, DOE takes no position on whether 

centrifugal fans (commonly referred to 

as ‘‘bladeless’’ ceiling fans) fit within 

the EPCA definition of a ceiling fan. 

DOE may consider this issue in a future 

rulemaking proceeding. 

Although the Framework Document 

did not specifically discuss ceiling fans 

capable of producing large volumes of 

airflow, such as those ceiling fans 

typically used in non-residential 

applications, DOE clarifies that any 

ceiling fan that meets the statutory 

definition is considered a covered 

product for which the test methods in 

this rulemaking apply.5 (78 FR 16443 

(Mar. 15, 2013)) Ceiling fans capable of 

producing large volumes of airflow are 

functionally similar to ceiling fans that 

produce less airflow and meet the 

definition of a ceiling fan, in that they 

are suspended from the ceiling, are 

nonportable, and produce airflow via 

the rotation of fan blades. Therefore, 

DOE clarifies that ceiling fans capable of 

producing large volumes of airflow are 

considered covered products. 

DOE notes that the proposed changes 

in interpretation of the ceiling fan 

definition discussed above would result 

in the applicability of the design 

standards set forth in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 

6295(ff)(1) to the following types of fans 

30 days after the publication of any final 

test procedure adopting such changes in 

interpretation: 

1. Fans suspended from the ceiling using 

a downrod or other means of suspension 

such that the fan is not mounted directly to 

the ceiling; 

2. Fans suspended such that they are 

mounted directly or close to the ceiling; 

3. Fans sold with the option of being 

suspended with or without a downrod; and 

4. Fans capable of producing large volumes 

of airflow. 

Because ceiling fan light kits are 

defined as ‘‘equipment designed to 

provide light from a ceiling fan that can 

be integral, such that the equipment is 

attached to the ceiling fan prior to the 

time of retail sale; or attachable, such 

that at the time of retail sale the 

equipment is not physically attached to 

the ceiling fan, but may be included 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62526 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

6Underwriters Laboratories Inc. UL Standard for 

Safety for Electric Fans, UL 507. 1999. Northbrook, 

IL. (Last accessed February 24, 2014) http://www. comm-2000.com/ProductDetail.aspx?

UniqueKey=8782. 

inside the ceiling fan at the time of sale 

or sold separately for subsequent 

attachment to the fan’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6291(50)(A), and (B)), DOE notes that 

light kits attached to any of the four fan 

types listed above would be covered 

ceiling fan light kits under these 

proposed changes in interpretation. 

In the concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for ceiling fans, 

DOE is considering a separate product 

class for highly decorative ceiling fans 

that would be exempt from performance 

standards. The current design standards 

specified in EPCA would still apply to 

such fans. 

2. Definitions of Low-Volume and HighVolume Ceiling Fans 

DOE proposes to define a ‘‘lowvolume ceiling fan’’ as ‘‘a ceiling fan 

that: (1) Is less than or equal to 7 feet 

in diameter, and has a blade thickness 

greater than or equal to 3.2 mm at the 

edge and a maximum tip speed less than 

or equal to the limit in Table 1; or (2) 

has a maximum airflow volume less 

than or equal to 5,000 CFM.’’ 

DOE proposes to define a ‘‘highvolume ceiling fan’’ as ‘‘a ceiling fan 

that: (1) Is greater than 7 feet in 

diameter, or has a blade thickness of 

less than 3.2 mm at the edge or a 

maximum tip speed that exceeds the 

threshold in Table 1; and (2) has a 

maximum airflow volume greater than 

5,000 CFM.’’ 

Table 1 indicates maximum speed tip 

for low-volume ceiling fans, dependent 

on blade thickness. The values in Table 

1 are based on the Underwriters 

Laboratory (UL) ceiling fan safety 

standard (UL Standard 507–1999, ‘‘UL 

Standard for Safety for Electric Fans’’) 

which designates maximum fan tip 

speeds (for a given thicknesses at the 

edge of the blades) that are safe for use 

in applications where the distance 

between the fan blades and the floor is 

10 feet or less.6

TABLE 1—LOW-VOLUME CEILING FANS, 7 FEET OR LESS IN DIAMETER

Airflow direction * 

Thickness (t) of edges of blades Maximum speed at tip of blades 

Mm (inch) m/s (feet per minute) 

Downward-Only ....................................................................... 4.8 > t ≥ 3.2 (3⁄16 > t ≥ 1⁄8) 16.3 (3200) 

Downward-Only ....................................................................... t ≥ 4.8 (t ≥ 3⁄16) 20.3 (4000) 

Reversible ................................................................................ 4.8 > t ≥ 3.2 (3⁄16 > t ≥ 1⁄8) 12.2 (2400) 

Reversible ................................................................................ t ≥ 4.8 (t ≥ 3⁄16) 16.3 (3200) 

* The ‘‘downward-only’’ and ‘‘reversible’’ airflow directions are mutually exclusive; therefore, a ceiling fan that can only produce airflow in the 

downward direction need only meet the ‘‘downward-only’’ blade edge thickness and tip speed requirements and a ceiling fan that can produce 

airflow in the downward and upward directions need only meet the ‘‘reversible’’ requirements. 

3. Definition of Hugger Ceiling Fan 

In the Framework Document for the 

ceiling fan energy conservation 

standards rulemaking, DOE considered 

establishing a definition for hugger 

ceiling fans. (78 FR 16443 (Mar. 15, 

2013)) Specifically, DOE stated it would 

consider defining a hugger ceiling fan: 

as ‘‘a ceiling fan where the average 

vertical distance between the fan blades 

and the ceiling fan is no more than [a 

specified number of] inches’’. DOE 

received several comments on the 

Framework Document regarding this 

definition. Most commenters, with the 

exception of ALA, were generally 

supportive of the proposed definition. 

The California investor-owned 

utilities, including the Pacific Gas and 

Electric Company, Southern California 

Edison, the San Diego Gas and Electric 

Company, and the Southern California 

Gas Company (hereafter the ‘‘CA IOUs’’) 

agreed with the definition. (CA IOUs, 

No. 45 at p. 2) Hunter, during the public 

meeting for the Framework Document, 

suggested that DOE consider specifying 

the definition in terms of maximum 

blade distance instead of average blade 

distance from the ceiling. (Hunter, No. 

9 at p. 32) Big Ass Fans (BAF) suggested 

that DOE consider a minimum vertical 

distance between the fan blades and 

ceiling not exceeding 10 inches. (BAF, 

No. 43 at p. 2) In contrast, ALA 

disagreed with DOE’s assertion that the 

primary point of differentiation is that 

hugger fans are ‘‘safe to use in rooms 

with low ceilings’’, believing that this 

definition is misleading and open to 

interpretation. Instead ALA proposed 

defining a hugger fan as a fan ‘‘where 

the only option is for the motor to be 

directly mounted to the ceiling’’. (ALA, 

No. 39 at p. 3–4) 

In determining an appropriate 

boundary between hugger and standard 

ceiling fans, an analysis was conducted 

of all ceiling fans available from Hansen 

Wholesale, an online wholesaler that 

sells a wide variety of ceiling fan 

brands. Ninety percent of ceiling fans 

described as hugger fans had blades that 

were an average distance of nine inches 

or less from the ceiling, suggesting that 

nine inches may be an appropriate 

threshold. By contrast, half of all ceiling 

fans that were described as standard 

ceiling fans had blades that were an 

average distance of twelve inches or less 

from the ceiling, suggesting that a higher 

threshold may result in the 

categorization of significant numbers of 

standard ceiling fans as hugger ceiling 

fans. 

Additionally, DOE agrees with Hunter 

that the maximum distance between the 

blades and the ceiling, instead of 

average distance, may be a more 

appropriate metric when considering 

whether a ceiling fan is safe to operate 

in a room with a low ceiling. Therefore, 

DOE is proposing to define a hugger 

ceiling fan in terms of the vertical 

distance between the ceiling and the 

lowest point on the fan blades. To 

account for the additional vertical 

distance between the average vertical 

position of the fan blades and the lowest 

point on the fan blades, DOE is 

proposing a modification to the vertical 

distance specified in the definition. 

Based on DOE’s analysis, one additional 

inch is appropriate given the typical 

width and pitch of a fan blade. 

Therefore, DOE is proposing to define a 

hugger ceiling fan as ‘‘a ceiling fan 

where the lowest point on the fan blades 

is no more than ten inches from the 

ceiling.’’ 

4. Definitions of Standard Ceiling Fan 

and Multi-Mount Ceiling Fan 

In accordance with the definition of a 

hugger ceiling fan, DOE is proposing to 

define a standard ceiling fan as ‘‘a 

ceiling fan where the lowest point on 

the fan blades is more than ten inches 

from the ceiling.’’ A multi-mount ceiling 

fan would be defined as ‘‘a ceiling fan 

that can be mounted in both the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62527 

7A notation in this form provides a reference for 

information that is in the docket of DOE’s 

rulemaking to develop energy conservation 

standards for ceiling fans and ceiling fan light kits 

(Docket No. EERE–2012–BT–STD–0045), which is 

maintained at www.regulations.gov. This notation 

indicates that the statement preceding the reference 

is document number 39 in the docket for the ceiling 

fan and ceiling fan light kits energy conservation 

standards rulemaking and appears at page 2 of that 

document. 

standard and hugger ceiling fan 

configurations.’’ 

DOE proposes to clarify that ceiling 

fans exist that can be mounted at more 

than one height, but that do not include 

at least one mounting option that meets 

that hugger ceiling fan definition and 

one option that meets the standard 

ceiling fan definition, would not meet 

the definition of a multi-mount fan (e.g., 

a ceiling fan where all mounting options 

result in the lowest point on the fan 

blades being more than ten inches from 

the ceiling would be classified as a 

standard ceiling fan). Such fans would 

be tested as described in section III.E.5, 

whereas multi-mount fans would be 

tested as described in section III.F.2. 

B. Effective Date and Compliance Date 

DOE is proposing amendments to its 

ceiling fan test procedure in Appendix 

U that would alter the way ceiling fans 

are currently tested and the dates for use 

of the test procedures. Because DOE 

does not currently have performancebased standards for ceiling fans as 

measured by the airflow efficiency, the 

proposals for Appendix U would not 

affect a manufacturer’s ability to comply 

with current energy conservation 

standards. 

Manufacturers would be required to 

use the revised Appendix U for 

representations of ceiling fan efficiency 

180 days after the publication of any 

final amended test procedures in the 

Federal Register. If DOE were to 

establish minimum energy conservation 

standards for ceiling fans as measured 

in airflow efficiency in the concurrent 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking, manufacturers would be 

required to use the revised Appendix U 

for determining compliance with any 

amended standards. 

DOE notes that the proposed changes 

in interpretation of the ceiling fan 

definition discussed above would result 

in the applicability of the design 

standards set forth in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 

6295(ff)(1) to the following types of fans 

30 days after the publication of any final 

test procedure adopting such changes in 

interpretation: 

1. Fans suspended from the ceiling using 

a downrod or other means of suspension 

such that the fan is not mounted directly to 

the ceiling; 

2. Fans suspended such that they are 

mounted directly or close to the ceiling; 

3. Fans sold with the option of being 

suspended with or without a downrod; and 

4. Fans capable of producing large volumes 

of airflow. 

In the concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for ceiling fans, 

DOE is considering a separate product 

class for highly decorative ceiling fans 

that would be exempt from performance 

standards. The current design standards 

specified in EPCA would still apply to 

such fans. 

To ensure that any amended energy 

conservation standards developed in the 

ongoing ceiling fan standards 

rulemaking account for any changes to 

the test procedure, DOE is proposing to 

consider standards based on the 

measured ceiling fan efficiency 

generated by the test procedure 

proposed in this rulemaking. 

C. Existing Test Procedure 

As noted above, DOE’s test procedure 

for ceiling fans is codified at 10 CFR 

430.23(w) and 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix U. The current DOE test 

procedure references the ‘‘ENERGY 

STAR Testing Facility Guidance 

Manual: Building a Testing Facility and 

Performing the Solid State Test Method 

for ENERGY STAR Qualified Ceiling 

Fans,’’ version 1.1. DOE notes that 

ENERGY STAR has since revised its test 

procedure, creating version 1.2 of 

ENERGY STAR’s guidance manual. 

DOE’s proposed test procedure is 

consistent with the EPCA requirement 

that the test procedure for ceiling fans 

be based on version 1.1, but the 

proposal set forth in this rule adopts 

portions of version 1.2 as appropriate. 

There are some slight differences 

between the proposed DOE test 

procedure and the ENERGY STAR test 

procedure. For instance, DOE proposes 

no modification in today’s rule to the 

ceiling fan warm-up time at a given fan 

speed. This means that the warm-up 

time in the proposed DOE test 

procedure is the same as the 15 minute 

warm-up time specified in the current 

DOE test procedure (and not the 30 

minute warm-up time before low speed 

specified in the ENERGY STAR test 

procedure v1.2). 

D. Proposed Metric 

DOE proposes to apply a metric, 

ceiling fan efficiency, to all ceiling fans. 

The metric would be based on airflow 

efficiency and would account for 

variations in fan design, fan speeds, and 

typical usage patterns. Airflow 

efficiency appears to be a universal 

metric used to describe the efficiency of 

ceiling fans and consists of airflow, i.e., 

the service provided by a ceiling fan, as 

measured in cubic feet per minute 

(CFM), divided by power consumption, 

which is measured in watts (W). 

1. Low-Volume Fans 

For low-volume ceiling fans, DOE is 

proposing to calculate ceiling fan 

efficiency based on the weighted 

average of airflow and power 

consumption at high and low fan 

speeds. 

The Framework Document for the 

ceiling fan energy conservation 

standards rulemaking requested 

comment on defining ‘‘high,’’ 

‘‘medium,’’ and ‘‘low’’ speeds. (78 FR 

16443 (Mar. 15, 2013)) Few comments 

were received on this topic, but the 

American Lighting Association (ALA) 

suggested defining ‘‘high’’ as the highest 

available fan speed and ‘‘low’’ as the 

lowest available fan speed. (ALA, No. 39 

at p. 2) 7 These suggested definitions 

appear reasonable, and DOE proposes to 

define ‘‘high speed’’ as the highest 

available speed, and to define ‘‘low 

speed’’ as the lowest available speed. 

Most low-volume ceiling fans have one 

or more speeds between high and low, 

but DOE proposes to measure only high 

and low speeds to limit the testing 

burden and avoid confusion regarding 

the definition of medium speed for 

ceiling fans with more than three 

speeds. 

DOE proposes to weight airflow and 

power consumption at high and low 

speeds in the ceiling fan efficiency 

metric for low-volume ceiling fans 

according to mean national hours of 

operation per day at each speed. 

2. High-Volume Ceiling Fans 

For high-volume ceiling fans, DOE 

proposes to calculate ceiling fan 

efficiency based on measured airflow 

and power consumption at high speed. 

High-volume ceiling fans are often not 

equipped with discrete speeds (e.g., 

low, medium, and high). Instead, highvolume ceiling fans may have a speed 

controller that is continuously 

adjustable. Given that speeds other than 

high may be ill-defined, DOE is 

proposing to test high-volume ceiling 

fans at high speed only. 

3. Incorporating Standby Power 

Consumption 

DOE is also addressing standby-mode 

and off-mode power consumption of 

ceiling fans in this NOPR. For both low 

and high-volume ceiling fans, DOE 

proposes to integrate standby-mode 

power consumption into the ceiling fan 

efficiency metric, as required by EPCA. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) EPCA defines 

‘‘standby mode’’ as the condition in 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62528 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

8 Kantner, C.L.S., S.J. Young, S.M. Donovan, K. 

Garbesi. Ceiling Fan and Ceiling Fan Light Kit Use 

in the U.S.—Results of a Survey on Amazon 

Mechanical Turk (2013) Lawrence Berkeley 

National Laboratory: Berkeley, CA. Report No. 

LBNL–6332E. 

which an energy-using product: is 

connected to a main power source, and 

offers one or more of the following useroriented or protective functions: (1) The 

ability to facilitate the activation or 

deactivation of other functions 

(including active mode) by remote 

switch (including remote control), 

internal sensor, or timer; and (2) 

continuous functions, including 

information or status displays 

(including clocks), or sensor-based 

functions. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)(iii)) 

‘‘Off mode’’ is the condition in which 

the ceiling fan is connected to a main 

power source and is not providing any 

standby or active mode function. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)(ii)) 

DOE is proposing a test method for 

measuring standby power consumption 

in both low-volume and high-volume 

fans (see section III.F.5). DOE proposes 

to incorporate the standby power value 

obtained from this test into the overall 

efficiency metric for the ceiling fan. 

DOE proposes to perform the standbymode test immediately following the 

active mode test. For those ceiling fans 

packaged with a light kit, this means 

that the light kit will still be attached 

during standby-mode testing, i.e., the 

configuration will be the same as for 

active mode testing. In the framework 

document, DOE proposed to assign all 

standby power consumption from a 

ceiling fan with a ceiling fan light kit to 

the ceiling fan only. Further research 

has indicated that for the typical 

configuration in which a remote device 

controls a ceiling fan paired with a 

ceiling fan light kit, the remote provides 

equal service to each device—the ability 

to turn on/off/adjust—and it requires no 

more or less energy to provide that 

service for the ceiling fan light kit than 

for the ceiling fan. The energy required 

to provide that service depends on the 

nature of the remote receiver, and not 

on the features of the ceiling fan or 

ceiling fan light kit. This would suggest 

that if a ceiling fan and a ceiling fan 

light kit share a remote, it would be 

appropriate to attribute half of the 

standby power to the ceiling fan. To 

include standby power consumption in 

the efficacy metric of a ceiling fan light 

kit, however, would be technically 

infeasible, because doing so would 

cause the efficacy of the ceiling fan light 

kit to differ from the efficacy of the 

lamps in the light kit. Therefore, to 

account for this standby power 

consumption, DOE proposes to attribute 

all the standby power consumption of a 

ceiling fan with a ceiling fan light kit to 

the ceiling fan only. DOE requests 

comments on this approach. 

Because DOE research and feedback 

from manufacturers indicates that there 

is no off-mode power consumption for 

these products, DOE is proposing not to 

include off-mode power in the ceiling 

fan efficiency metric. 

4. Operating Hours 

At the public meeting on the 

Framework Document, Fanimation 

commented that most consumers use 

their [low-volume] ceiling fan at low or 

medium speed, citing a social media 

poll. (Fanimation, No. 9 at p.68) In 

written comments on the Framework 

Document, Capital Lighting stated that 

the typical user operates a ceiling fan at 

low or medium speed. (Capital Lighting, 

No. 27 at p. 3) Progress Lighting also 

commented that high speed is not the 

most common mode of operation. 

(Progress Lighting, No. 6 at p. 2) Hunter 

Fans and ALA both cited an AcuPOLL®

Precision Research, Inc. survey 

submitted by ALA and commissioned 

by Hunter, which reports that low is the 

typical operating speed of about 30 

percent of ceiling fans, that medium is 

the typical speed of about 50 percent of 

ceiling fans, and that high is the typical 

speed of about 20 percent of ceiling 

fans. (ALA, No. 39 at p. 2 and Hunter, 

No. 37 at p.3) 

A report on ceiling fan energy use (the 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 

(LBNL) titled ‘‘Ceiling Fan and Ceiling 

Fan Light Kit Use in the U.S.’’ 8) 

suggests, however, that high speed may 

be the most commonly used speed. In 

the LBNL survey, a representative 

sample of more than 2,500 ceiling fan 

users were asked to break down the 

fraction of ceiling fan on-time spent at 

each speed, and the responses indicated 

that in aggregate, high is the most 

commonly used speed (on average 41% 

of the time a fan is in operation), and 

low is the least commonly used speed 

(on average 22% of the time a fan is in 

operation). By contrast, the AcuPOLL 

survey did not inquire into the fraction 

of time spent at each speed, instead 

asking respondents for a single 

‘‘typical’’ speed. Therefore, the LBNL 

survey provides a more disaggregated 

dataset on which DOE can base its usage 

profile. DOE proposes to use the daily 

national-average hours of operation 

reported in LBNL’s survey as the basis 

for weighting energy consumption at 

high and low speed (see Table 2). To 

convert the values reported at high, 

medium, and low in LBNL’s survey to 

high and low speed only, DOE allocated 

the operating hours reported for 

medium speed to high and low speeds 

using the ratio of time spent at high and 

low speeds. DOE seeks comment on its 

proposed operating hours for calculating 

ceiling fan efficiency for low-volume 

ceiling fans. 

For ceiling fans that operate in 

standby mode, DOE assumes that the 

ceiling fan is always activated by remote 

and is, therefore, assumed to never be 

‘‘off.’’ This assumption is likely to have 

little impact on measured ceiling fan 

efficiency, because it is DOE’s 

understanding that the majority of 

ceiling fans with built-in remotes do not 

include built-in on/off switches and so 

cannot be placed into off mode. 

Therefore, this split between standby 

and off mode is rarely, if ever, 

applicable. 

To estimate the hours of operation 

data for high-volume ceiling fans, DOE 

used feedback from manufacturers 

indicating that, while the hours of 

operation may vary significantly across 

industry and application (e.g., 

warehouses or manufacturing facilities), 

12 hours per day spent in active mode 

may be a representative value. DOE, 

therefore, proposes to assume 12 hours 

of daily operation in active mode for 

high-volume ceiling fans. DOE seeks 

comment and any available data on 

operating hours for high-volume ceiling 

fans. 

TABLE 2—DAILY OPERATING HOURS FOR CALCULATING CEILING FAN EFFICIENCY

No standby With standby 

Daily Operating Hours for Low-Volume Ceiling Fans 

High Speed .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 .2 4 .2 

Low Speed ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 .2 2 .2 

Standby Mode ...................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0 17 .6 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62529 

TABLE 2—DAILY OPERATING HOURS FOR CALCULATING CEILING FAN EFFICIENCY—Continued 

No standby With standby 

Off Mode .............................................................................................................................................................. 17 .6 0 

Daily Operating Hours for High-Volume Ceiling Fans 

Active Mode ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 .0 12 .0 

Standby Mode ...................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0 12 .0 

Off Mode .............................................................................................................................................................. 12 .0 0 

5. Metric for Ceiling Fan Efficiency 

DOE proposes the following equations 

to determine ceiling fan efficiency. 

Low-volume ceiling fans: 

Where: 

CFMi = airflow at a given speed, 

OHi = operating hours at a given speed, 

Wi = power consumption at a given speed, 

H = high speed, 

L = low speed, 

OHSb = operating hours in standby mode, and 

WSb = power consumption in standby mode. 

DOE is not aware of any low-volume 

ceiling fans with continuously variable 

speed control currently on the market. 

If such ceiling fans are manufactured in 

the future, DOE will consider 

amendments to the test procedure to 

accommodate these fans, where other 

speeds may not be well-defined, as 

needed. 

High-volume ceiling fans: 

Where: 

CFMH = airflow at high speed, 

OHA = operating hours in active mode, 

WH = power consumption at high speed, 

OHSb = operating hours in standby mode, and 

WSb = power consumption in standby mode. 

6. Power Factor 

DOE received a comment in response 

to the Framework Document from 

PG&E, SCGC, SDG&E, and SCE (CA 

IOUs) stating that evaluation of power 

factor should be included in the test 

procedure for ceiling fans due to the 

impact of power factor on power quality 

and transmission efficiency of the 

electric grid. CA IOUs also commented 

that the significance of power factor 

increases as brushless permanent 

magnet motors become more popular. 

(CA IOUs, No. 12 at p.5) DOE 

acknowledges that phase shifts 

introduced into the grid by loads could 

theoretically increase power production 

and transmission system demands. 

However, it is the net impact of many 

loads that ultimately determines the 

impact, which in turn depends on a 

dynamically changing load mix. DOE is 

not aware of field data quantifying the 

impact of power factor on the electric 

grid. DOE is not proposing a change in 

the test procedure to account for power 

factor. 

E. Other Proposed Modifications to 

Current Test Procedure 

1. Clarification That Low-Volume 

Ceiling Fans Should be Tested at High 

and Low Speeds 

DOE proposes to require testing at 

high and low fan speeds for low-volume 

ceiling fans because low-volume ceiling 

fans typically have more than one speed 

setting that may be selected by the 

consumer. Such an approach would 

allow the ceiling fan efficiency metric to 

be representative of average use. The 

current DOE test procedure for ceiling 

fans allows for testing at all available 

fan speeds but does not specify how 

many speeds should be tested. In the 

Framework Document for the ceiling 

fans energy conservation standards 

rulemaking, DOE considered testing at 

one or multiple ceiling fan speeds and 

sought comment. A number of 

commenters weighed in on this subject, 

with some in favor of testing at multiple 

speeds and others in favor of testing at 

a single speed. 

The Appliance Standards Awareness 

Project (ASAP), the National Consumer 

Law Center (NCLC), the National 

Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and 

the Northwest Energy Efficiency 

Alliance (NEEA) commented that DOE 

should develop a test procedure that 

includes measurements of airflow 

efficiency at multiple fan speeds. These 

commenters presented ENERGY STAR 

data at different fan speeds, arguing that 

airflow efficiency at a given speed is not 

necessarily a good predictor of airflow 

efficiency at other speeds. (ASAP, 

NCLC, NRDC, and NEEA, No. 14 at pp. 

4–5) ALA commented that the 

assumption is being made that the 

testing mentioned is for ENERGY STAR 

qualification; if that assumption is true, 

then high is the only speed that needs 

to be tested because it is always the least 

efficient of the speeds. (ALA, No. 39 at 

p.11) Progress Lighting noted that 

testing at multiple speeds is already 

required by both Energy Star and 

California Title 20. (Progress Lighting, 

No. 6 at p.3) 

In assessing how many speeds should 

be tested, DOE notes that data from 

Hunter Fans (included in a 2004 report 

by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), 

‘‘Analysis of Standards Options For 

Ceiling Fans’’) suggest that high speed is 

usually, but not always, the leastefficient speed. For 4 out of 26 ceiling 

fans tested, low speed was actually the 

least-efficient speed setting, and the 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.004</GPH> EP17OC14.005</GPH>
62530 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

9Canadian Standards Association. CAN/CSA– 

C814–10—Energy Performance of Ceiling Fans. 

2010. (Last accessed February 24, 2014) http://shop.

csa.ca/en/canada/energy-efficiency/cancsa-c814- 

10/invt/27005372010. 

variability of efficiency at low speed 

was significantly larger than at high 

speed, suggesting more opportunity for 

improvement in efficiency at low speed. 

DOE is obligated to have a test 

procedure that reflects ‘‘a representative 

average use cycle or period of use’’, but 

which is not ‘‘unduly burdensome to 

conduct’’. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) Testing 

at more than one speed allows for a 

more representative indication of ceiling 

fan efficiency and increases the 

usefulness of efficiency labels for 

consumers. Additionally, as high speed 

is not always the least-efficient speed, 

DOE proposes to test at both high and 

low speeds. The proposed approach 

would limit the test burden and 

maintain a consistent test burden for all 

low-volume ceiling fans, the vast 

majority of which have between three 

and six speeds. Testing specifically at 

the highest and lowest available speeds, 

instead of at three speeds, would also 

avoid any ambiguity regarding the 

definition of medium speed for ceiling 

fans with more than three speeds. DOE 

requests comment on testing lowvolume ceiling fans at the highest and 

lowest fan speeds. 

2. Elimination of the Requirement for a 

Test Cylinder To Be Used During 

Testing 

A test cylinder is included in the 

experimental setup of the current DOE 

test procedure for ceiling fans. Its 

intended purpose is to control the 

direction of airflow. During the public 

meeting for the Framework Document in 

the ceiling fans energy conservation 

standards rulemaking, Hunter Fans 

commented that there was little 

variation in airflow test results 

regardless of whether a test cylinder was 

used when conducting testing under the 

DOE test procedure. (Hunter, No. 9 at 

p.56) In a written comment on the 

Framework Document, ALA stated that: 

(1) Test results from a certified 

laboratory found that the measured CFM 

(cubic feet per minute) [at high speed] 

on 28 different test samples (various 

diameters) using the specified cylinder 

(with a diameter 8’’ larger than the fan 

diameter) vs. no cylinder at all varied on 

average by 1.1 percent without the use 

of the cylinder; (2) the standard 

deviation was 1.0 percent and the max/ 

min was 3.1/0.1 percent respectively; (3) 

based on these data, the manufacturers 

suggest that use of the cylinder should 

not be required. (ALA, No. 39 at p.9) 

To determine the effect of the test 

cylinder on airflow measurements, DOE 

conducted testing on three ceiling fans 

both with and without a test cylinder. 

The 44-inch, 52-inch, and 56-inch 

ceiling fans used were tested at all three 

available speeds. The airflow 

measurements indicated a difference of 

2–10 percent between the two testing 

scenarios, but there was no consistent 

dependence on ceiling fan size or fan 

speed. The calculated variance of the 

measurement data, however, was almost 

20 percent lower overall when testing 

without a test cylinder, suggesting that 

testing without a cylinder is a 

statistically less noisy approach to 

measuring airflow. This difference in 

measurement error could perhaps be 

due to turbulence created by the 

interaction of the airflow with the side 

of the test cylinder. 

Because testing without a test 

cylinder appears to be a more accurate 

approach to measuring airflow and more 

closely simulates installed usage 

conditions than with a cylinder in 

place, DOE proposes to eliminate the 

requirement to test with a test cylinder. 

This reduces test burden for 

manufacturers who may want to 

introduce new ceiling fan sizes and 

would otherwise have to pay for a new 

test cylinder, as well as reducing 

potential market distortions that would 

favor ceiling fans at sizes corresponding 

to existing test cylinders. Additionally, 

this would more closely harmonize with 

the test procedure for high-volume 

ceiling fans (see section III.F.1), which 

does not include a test cylinder. 

DOE proposes that the effective area 

and the number of sensors used to 

measure airflow for a given ceiling fan 

would still be the same as in the current 

test procedure—that is, the effective 

area over which airflow is calculated 

would be a circle 8 inches larger in 

diameter than the fan blade span. The 

distance between the ceiling fan blades 

and the air velocity sensors also would 

not change. The test cylinder would 

simply not be installed prior to testing. 

3. Addition of a False Ceiling to the 

Experimental Set-Up 

In the Framework Document, DOE 

suggested investigating methodologies 

for testing hugger ceiling fans (i.e., fans 

mounted very close to the ceiling) and 

mentioned the existence of a hugger fan 

test method in CAN/CSA–C814–10, 

‘‘Energy Performance of Ceiling Fans,’’ 

which includes a false ceiling in the test 

set-up.9 The comments received on this 

topic were generally in favor of testing 

with a false ceiling, although Big Ass 

Fans commented that it is important to 

maintain the same distance between the 

ceiling fan blades and the test sensors as 

in a standard test set-up for low-volume 

ceiling fans to ensure an appropriate 

measurement for comparison to a 

standard low-volume ceiling fan. (BAF, 

No. 43 at p.2) 

DOE conducted testing on ceiling fans 

advertised as hugger fans both with and 

without a false ceiling in place. Having 

a false ceiling in place for these fans 

resulted in a 30-percent to 50-percent 

decrease in measured airflow compared 

to testing without a false ceiling. One 

ceiling fan was tested in both the hugger 

and standard configurations with a false 

ceiling in place, in addition to being 

tested without a false ceiling. For this 

fan, a 50-percent reduction in airflow 

was found in the hugger configuration 

with the false ceiling in place when 

compared to the airflow from the same 

fan without a false ceiling. When tested 

in the standard configuration with the 

false ceiling in place, a 35-percent 

reduction in airflow was still observed 

when compared to the airflow from the 

same fan without a false ceiling. The 

implication was that the presence of a 

false ceiling had a larger impact on 

airflow than switching from the 

standard to the hugger configuration. 

Using a false ceiling when testing all 

low-volume ceiling fans is more 

representative of actual ceiling fan use 

in a home, where fans are mounted 

directly to the ceiling. Using a different 

experimental setup for hugger fans than 

for other low-volume ceiling fans would 

also affect efficiency representations on 

the labels of different types of ceiling 

fans and result in market 

representations of ceiling fan efficiency 

that cannot be readily compared. Such 

an approach would potentially put fans 

tested with a false ceiling (such as 

hugger or multi-mount ceiling fans) at a 

competitive disadvantage compared to 

standard ceiling fans. While this change 

to the test procedure would involve a 

one-time test burden for testing facilities 

to install a false ceiling, it should not 

result in an additional cost per test 

thereafter. 

DOE also compared the effect on 

airflow measurements of having a false 

ceiling in place that was 8 inches versus 

16 inches larger in width and breadth 

than the blade span of the ceiling fan. 

DOE found no appreciable reduction in 

airflow with a larger false ceiling in 

place. This implies that a false ceiling 

8 inches larger than the blade span of a 

ceiling fan is sufficiently large to 

approximate a ceiling. 

DOE proposes to test all low-volume 

ceiling fans with the addition of a false 

ceiling directly above the ceiling fan. 

The distance between the lowest point 

on the ceiling fan blades and the air 

velocity sensors should be the same as 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62531 

10U.S. Department of Energy—Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer Products: 

Framework Document: Energy Efficiency Program 

for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Ceiling Fans and Ceiling Fan Light 

Kits. March 2013. Washington, DC http://www.

regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2012- 

BT-STD-0045-0002. 

in the current DOE test procedure. The 

length and breadth of the false ceiling 

should be at least 8 inches larger than 

the blade span of the ceiling fan. DOE 

seeks comment on its proposal to add a 

false ceiling to the experimental setup 

for all low-volume ceiling fan testing. 

4. Clarification of the Distance Between 

the Ceiling Fan Blades and the Air 

Velocity Sensors 

As the Framework Document for the 

ceiling fans energy conservation 

standard rulemaking notes, the test setup for the current DOE test procedure 

assumes that ceiling fan blades are 

reasonably flat.10 The test procedure 

specifies that a test cylinder is to be 

hung below the ceiling fan such that 

there is a 6-inch vertical gap between 

the middle of the fan blade tips and the 

top of the test cylinder. Without a test 

cylinder in place, this is effectively a 

specification of the vertical gap between 

the middle of the fan blade tips and the 

heads of the air velocity sensors. It may 

be unclear as to how the ‘‘middle of 

blade tip’’ measurements should be 

made for fans having non-flat blades or 

unusual shapes. 

ALA commented in response to the 

Framework Document that: (1) The 

manufacturers suggest maintaining the 

same test methodology regardless of 

blade shape; (2) while nontraditional 

blade shapes may affect airflow, they 

should not be tested differently based 

on improved or reduced airflow 

capability; and (3) changing the test 

method based on blade shape could 

potentially create advantages or 

disadvantages, so a uniform method is 

suggested. (ALA, No. 39 at p.9) 

DOE performed tests to assess the 

impact of measuring airflow using a 

vertical distance measured from the 

bottom of the blade tip compared to a 

vertical distance measured from the 

middle of the blade tip. Airflow was 

measured for two 52-inch fans on low, 

medium, and high speeds in the two 

different vertical distance 

configurations. One fan was chosen 

specifically for having a nontraditional 

curved blade shape with an ambiguous 

middle of the blade tip. Testing for both 

fans indicated that measurements of 

airflow using the two configurations 

were consistent to within 3 percent on 

medium and high speeds and 6 percent 

on low speed. Therefore, to avoid the 

potential ambiguity of the phrase 

‘‘middle of blade tip,’’ DOE proposes to 

instead define the vertical gap in terms 

of the distance between the lowest point 

on the ceiling fan blades and the heads 

of the air velocity sensors. This would 

apply to all low-volume ceiling fan 

blades to ensure a congruent test for 

airflow. 

5. Clarification of the Appropriate Fan 

Configuration During Testing for LowVolume Ceiling Fans 

DOE research indicates that a number 

of low-volume ceiling fans can be 

mounted at more than one height while 

still being classified as either a standard 

or hugger ceiling fan (rather than 

meeting DOE’s definition of a multimount fan). As an example, a ceiling fan 

that can be mounted at three different 

heights, all of which result in the lowest 

point on the fan blades being more than 

ten inches from the ceiling, would be 

classified as a standard ceiling fan. 

Therefore, DOE proposes to clarify that 

if more than one mounting option is 

included with a fan that would meet the 

definition of a standard low-volume 

ceiling fan, that ceiling fan should be 

tested in the configuration with the 

smallest distance between the ceiling 

and the lowest part of the fan blades. 

Similarly, if more than one mounting 

option is included with a fan that would 

meet the definition of a hugger lowvolume ceiling fan, that ceiling fan 

should be tested in the configuration 

with the smallest distance between the 

ceiling and the lowest part of the fan 

blades. DOE seeks data and comment on 

how these fans are actually configured 

in the field. 

6. Clarification of the Test Method for 

Ceiling Fans With Heaters 

The Framework Document for the 

ceiling fans energy conservation 

standards rulemaking noted that some 

ceiling fans are sold with combined 

heating elements, although the extent to 

which such heaters are used is 

unclear.10 DOE preliminarily concluded 

that it would not consider the power 

consumption by the heater in the 

rulemaking and asked for comment. The 

only comment received on this topic 

supported DOE’s planned approach. 

(ALA, No. 39 at p. 11) DOE proposes to 

clarify that during testing, any ceiling 

fan packaged with a heater should be 

tested with the heater in place 

(representative of the configuration 

when the fan is used by a consumer) but 

switched off. 

7. Revision of the Allowable Tolerance 

for Air Velocity Sensors Used During 

Testing 

As noted in the Framework Document 

for the ceiling fans energy conservation 

standard rulemaking, the current DOE 

test procedure incorporates by reference 

ENERGY STAR guidance manual v1.1, 

which requires air speed sensors with 

an accuracy of +/¥ 1 percent or better. 

ENERGY STAR guidance manual v1.2, 

however, requires air speed sensors 

with an accuracy of only +/¥ 5 percent 

or better. The Framework Document 

suggested that the appropriate tolerance 

may need to be reevaluated.10

ALA commented that ceiling fan 

manufacturers are of the opinion that 

the accuracy sensor specified in the 

current ENERGY STAR guidance 

manual (+/¥ 5%) is acceptable, but 

they recommended that a test fan be 

distributed among all laboratories 

certified to perform DOE’s ceiling fan 

test procedure and that testing be 

conducted to ensure that all of the labs 

correlate. (ALA, No. 39 at p. 7) 

To determine whether sensor 

accuracy affects airflow measurements, 

DOE compared the variation in mean air 

speeds when testing with sensors with 

different accuracy ratings and 

investigated the variation in raw air 

speed readings from a single sensor 

type. First, DOE compared the average 

air speeds reported by two different test 

laboratories for the same ceiling fan. 

One laboratory used sensors matching 

the tolerance allowed by ENERGY STAR 

guidance manual v1.2: the maximum of 

5 percent of the reading or 1 percent of 

the full-range sensor accuracy. The 

other laboratory used sensors with a 

better accuracy: the maximum of 2 

percent of the reading or 0.5 percent of 

the selected range. If the uncertainty in 

mean air speed was due to sensor 

accuracy, the ratio of the standard errors 

between the labs should have been 

similar to the ratio of sensor accuracies 

(i.e., 5:2). DOE found, however, that 

both laboratories had a similar standard 

error of mean air speed, which 

significantly exceeded the expected 

error due to sensor accuracy. Second, 

DOE investigated the coefficients of 

variation for raw air speed 

measurements from several ceiling fans 

tested in a single laboratory. The 

coefficients of variation were 

approximately ten times greater than 

would be expected if the measurement 

uncertainty came only from the sensor 

accuracy. 

Based on these analyses, DOE 

concluded that the variation in 

measured air speed was not greatly 

affected by the accuracy of the sensors 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62532 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

11Rohles, F.H., Jr., J.E. Laviana, T.E. Shrimplin, 

Assessing Air Velocities from the Industrial Ceiling 

Fan (1986). ASHRAE Transactions, vol. 92, pt. 1A: 

San Francisco, CA. 

used in the two test laboratories. As a 

result, there appears to be no reason to 

require the use of sensors with accuracy 

better than +/¥ 5 percent of the reading. 

Accordingly, DOE proposes to change 

the sensor tolerances from the current 

test procedure value of 1 percent to 5 

percent. 

F. Proposed Additional Test Methods 

1. Addition of a Test Method for HighVolume Ceiling Fans 

High-volume ceiling fans (where 

volume refers to airflow volume) are 

typically offered in a range of diameters 

from 36 inches to 24 feet. The large size 

of some high-volume ceiling fans cannot 

be accommodated by existing ceiling fan 

test facilities for low-volume ceiling 

fans without significant modifications. 

In some cases, the ceiling fans would 

simply not fit into the test room. 

AMCA 230, ‘‘Laboratory Methods of 

Testing Air Circulating Fans for Rating 

and Certification,’’ is the industry test 

procedure for high-volume ceiling fans. 

The test procedure describes a ceiling 

fan hung from a load cell. When the 

ceiling fan is turned on, the measured 

change in force on the load cell allows 

thrust to be calculated, and AMCA 230 

provides an equation for calculating 

airflow based on thrust. This is a 

different approach than the current DOE 

test procedure for low-volume ceiling 

fans, which measures air velocity 

directly. Given the large dimensions of 

some high-volume ceiling fans, an 

approach based on AMCA 230 

(requiring only a load cell) appears to be 

more practical than an approach based 

on the current DOE test procedure for 

low-volume ceiling fans, which requires 

an array of sensors. 

The latest version of the AMCA 230 

test procedure (AMCA 230–12) specifies 

that it is to be applied to ceiling fans 6 

feet in diameter or smaller. A previous 

version of AMCA 230 (AMCA 230–07), 

however, allows for testing larger ceiling 

fans with no restriction on fan size, 

using a modified version of the test 

procedure. In the modified version, the 

restrictions on the room dimensions 

with respect to the fan size are relaxed 

and not specified. Even for those ceiling 

fans with diameters in the 20–24 feet 

range, performance specifications (such 

as airflow and airflow efficiency) can be 

found on Web sites and in manuals of 

several manufacturers, suggesting that it 

is possible to test ceiling fans with large 

diameters. 

For ceiling fans up to 24 feet in 

diameter, DOE proposes testing highvolume ceiling fans in keeping with 

industry practice, using a test procedure 

based on AMCA 230–12, and 

incorporating AMCA 230–12 by 

reference. It appears plausible to test 

even large high-volume ceiling fans 

according to such a test procedure, with 

some modification to the specified room 

dimensions. DOE proposes to modify 

the specified room dimensions for highvolume ceiling fans in the following 

ways: (1) The minimum distance 

between the ceiling and the blades of a 

ceiling fan being tested is 44 inches for 

all blade diameters, (2) ceiling fans 

larger than 6 feet in diameter must have 

a 20 foot clearance between the floor 

and the blades of the fan being tested, 

and (3) for ceiling fans larger than 6 feet 

in diameter, the minimum distance 

between the centerline of a ceiling fan 

being tested and walls and large 

obstructions all around is half the 

ceiling fan blade span plus 10 feet. The 

proposed requirement for a minimum 

distance between the ceiling and the 

blades would mean that even the largest 

ceiling fans, at 24 feet in diameter, 

would have a clearance of at least 15 

percent of the fan blade diameter, and 

that the clearance will be roughly 

equivalent to the clearance for lowvolume ceiling fans. The proposed 

minimum clearance between the blades 

and the floor is based on the typical 

installation environment for fans larger 

than 6 feet in diameter. Distances 

greater than 20 feet could impose testing 

burden by requiring very tall testing 

rooms. Additionally, a distance of 20 

feet between the floor and the fan blades 

is one of the distances recommended by 

researchers on this topic.11 The 

proposed minimum clearance laterally 

about the blades is designed to balance 

the need for unobstructed airflow 

patterns in the room with not requiring 

a testing facility that would be 

excessively burdensome to create. DOE 

seeks comment on these proposed 

changes to the room specifications. 

DOE is not aware of any third-party 

testing facility that currently tests largediameter, high-volume ceiling fans. The 

large amount of space required to 

conduct the proposed test procedure 

may be the primary constraint in 

establishing such a test facility. For 

example, the proposed room 

requirements for a ceiling fan 24 feet in 

diameter are a room that is at least 44 

feet square, that is free of large 

obstructions, and has a ceiling height of 

approximately 24 feet. DOE requests 

information on how manufacturers 

currently test large-diameter, highvolume ceiling fans, as well as the 

availability of suitable third-party 

testing facilities that can conduct the 

proposed test procedure and the ability 

to develop such facilities. 

2. Addition of a Test Method for LowVolume Multi-Mount Ceiling Fans 

DOE is proposing to define multimount ceiling fans as ceiling fans that 

can be mounted in both the standard 

and hugger ceiling fan configurations 

(see Section III.A.4). The Framework 

Document for the ceiling fans energy 

conservation standards rulemaking 

suggested that multi-mount ceiling fans 

should be tested with the fan installed 

in the hugger configuration. (78 FR 

16443 (Mar. 15, 2013)) 

ALA commented that multi-mount 

ceiling fans should be tested in the 

standard ceiling fan configuration. ALA 

cited the AcuPOLL survey, which 

indicates that 73 percent of multi-mount 

ceiling fans are installed in the standard 

configuration. (ALA, No. 39 at pp.8–9) 

ALA also suggested that, if needed, a 

statement can be added to show which 

configuration was used for the CFM test. 

King of Fans (KOF) commented that it 

does not agree with testing the 

multi-mount fans in the hugger/flush 

mount configuration, as it can make the 

multi-mount fans (which provide a 

consumer benefit) noncompetitive with 

fans that do not have the flush mount 

option, at least in terms of reported 

energy efficiency. KOF stated that 

testing multi-mount fans in this manner 

would cause the CFM ratings to be 

affected, which may in turn cause a 

customer to default to a higher-rated 

CFM product; this would put the 

multi-mount fans at a competitive 

disadvantage. (KOF, No.42 at p.1) 

Progress Lighting also commented that 

multi-mount ceiling fans should be 

tested in the standard configuration, 

stating that customized configurations 

have many variables that cannot be 

controlled for in the analysis. (Progress 

Lighting, No. 6 at pp.2–3) 

On the other hand, CA IOUs 

suggested establishing two performance 

standards for multi-mount ceiling fans: 

(1) one for when the fan is in the hugger 

position (same as the hugger product 

class standard), and (2) another for 

when the fan is in a standard position. 

(CA IOUs, No. 12 at p. 2) 

Since multi-mount ceiling fans can be 

installed in either standard or hugger 

configuration, DOE proposes to test lowvolume multi-mount ceiling fans in both 

configurations: (1) In the configuration 

that meets the definition of a standard 

ceiling fan, while minimizing the 

distance the ceiling and the lowest part 

of the fan blades, and (2) in the 

configuration that meets the definition 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62533 

of a hugger ceiling fan, while 

minimizing the distance between the 

ceiling and the lowest part of the fan 

blades. DOE seeks comment on whether 

manufacturers should be required to test 

multi-mount ceiling fans in the standard 

configuration, hugger configuration, 

both configurations, or all 

configurations for which they are 

capable of being installed. 

3. Addition of a Test Method for MultiHeaded Ceiling Fans 

In the Framework Document for the 

ceiling fans standards rulemaking, DOE 

discussed the challenges presented 

regarding testing of multi-head ceiling 

fans.10 One challenge is that the variable 

geometry of multi-head fans may make 

it difficult to compare test results among 

either different types of multi-head 

ceiling fans or between multi-head fans 

and fans with a single head. Another 

challenge is that the effective blade span 

of some multi-head ceiling fans may 

exceed the area that can currently be 

tested with air velocity sensors. DOE 

stated that it was considering testing 

only one of the ceiling fan heads, with 

the other fan head motors turned off, 

and treating the fan head like a standard 

single-head ceiling fan. The airflow and 

power consumption associated with one 

head could then be multiplied by the 

number of fan heads in the multi-head 

ceiling fan. DOE asked for comment on 

this approach. Comments on the 

Framework Document were generally in 

favor of testing a single fan head for a 

multi-head fan, with some exceptions. 

In its comments, Fanimation 

recommended that DOE test only one of 

the ceiling fan heads, with the other fan 

head motors turned off, treating the fan 

head like a standard single-head ceiling 

fan. Fanimation further suggested that: 

(1) The airflow and airflow efficiency 

could be rated for the individual head, 

and (2) the total airflow for multiple 

heads could be determined by 

multiplying the airflow from one fan by 

the number of heads, assuming all are 

of equal construction and diameter. 

Fanimation concluded that no 

alternative testing strategy is necessary 

and that testing multiple fan heads 

would be overly burdensome. 

(Fanimation, No. 32 at p. 3) ALA 

commented that, provided the fan 

blades of each fan head turn at 

approximately the same RPM 

(revolutions per minute), it suggests 

measuring the CFM of one fan head and 

multiplying the results times the total 

number of fan heads. (ALA, No. 39 at 

p.10) 

ASAP, NCLC, NRDC, and NEEA 

commented that one potential approach 

would be for manufacturers to certify 

that the fan heads that are not tested do 

not have any characteristics that are 

different from those of the tested fan 

head that affect efficiency (similar to the 

language used for determining ‘‘basic 

models’’). Furthermore, ASAP, NCLC, 

NRDC, and NEEA suggested that, for the 

case where individual fan heads do 

have different characteristics that affect 

efficiency, multiple fan heads would 

need to be tested. (ASAP, NCLC, NRDC, 

and NEEA, No. 14 at p. 4) 

CA IOUs recommended conducting 

testing with multiple fan heads running 

simultaneously to account for 

interactive effects, stating that testing 

only one fan head could be overlooking 

a significant drop in fan performance 

that DOE should take into account. (CA 

IOUs, No 12 at p.3) 

To assess the impact of measuring 

airflow and power consumption based 

on a single fan head versus more than 

one head operating simultaneously, 

DOE conducted a series of tests on a 

multi-head ceiling fan with two 

identical fan heads. The ceiling fan 

system was first tested with both fan 

heads operating simultaneously, with 

the midpoint of the fan system centered 

where the four sensor axes meet. The 

fan heads were oriented along the A–C 

sensor axis and faced straight 

downwards. Next, with the ceiling fan 

system still in the same position and 

orientation, DOE measured the results 

for each individual fan head with the 

other fan head turned off via a switch 

on the center housing of the fan. In 

addition to airflow measurements, DOE 

recorded the power consumption of the 

fan system for each test. 

Overall, the airflow velocity profile 

for the two fan heads turned on 

simultaneously was roughly similar to 

the sum of testing each fan head 

individually. Tests with individual fan 

heads produced more airflow along the 

outermost sensors along the A–C axis. 

Both heads running simultaneously 

directed more air towards the center of 

the system. Compared to the sum of 

measurements from individual fan 

heads, the test done with both heads 

running simultaneously measured 7–20 

percent less total airflow, depending on 

fan speed. 

However, DOE notes that multi-head 

ceiling fans are designed to provide 

airflow over a larger area than singlehead fans. When testing multiple fan 

heads simultaneously, it is unclear 

whether the airflow measurements 

made by sensors designed to capture the 

airflow of an individual fan head is an 

adequate representation of the airflow 

that consumers with a multi-head fan 

may experience. Unlike a single-head 

ceiling fan, which is centered on the 

meeting point of the four sensor axes, 

the individual fan heads of a multi-head 

fan are displaced from where the sensor 

axes meet, and airflow may not be 

adequately measured because the 

sensors are no longer directly beneath 

the fan heads. This will likely 

underestimate the airflow directly 

underneath the fan heads. This problem 

would be compounded for multi-head 

fans with more than two fan heads. This 

suggests that testing an individual fan 

head, and multiplying by the number of 

fan heads, may yield a more 

representative measurement. 

Additionally, DOE recognizes that 

testing large multi-head fans with all fan 

heads operating simultaneously is not 

feasible due to the size constraints of 

testing facilities and the number of 

sensors required to adequately measure 

the fan’s velocity profile. In light of this 

testing constraint, and the possibility 

that the sensor apparatus will not yield 

representative results because it is 

designed to measure airflow near the 

intersection of the sensor axes, DOE 

proposes to test multi-headed ceiling 

fans by testing a single fan head, with 

the fan head in the same position as 

when a fan with a single head is tested, 

such that it is directly over sensor 1 (i.e., 

at the center of the test set-up, where the 

four sensor axes meet). This can be 

accomplished by either offsetting the 

entire false ceiling, or the multi-head 

fan with respect to the false ceiling, as 

long as the requirement that the false 

ceiling extend at least 8 inches beyond 

the blade span of the centered fan head 

is maintained. Supporting chains, wires, 

or ropes may be used to keep the false 

ceiling level, if the multi-head ceiling 

fan is offset with respect to the false 

ceiling. The distance between the air 

velocity sensors and the fan blades of 

the centered fan head should be the 

same as for all other low-volume ceiling 

fans. Switching on only the centered fan 

head, the airflow measurements should 

be made in the same manner as for all 

other low-volume ceiling fans. 

If a multi-head ceiling fan includes 

more than one type of ceiling fan head, 

then at least one of each unique type 

should be tested. Differences in fan head 

construction such as housing, blade 

pitch, or motor could affect air 

movement or power consumption and 

would constitute a different type of fan 

head. If all the fan heads are of the same 

type, then only one fan head needs to 

be tested. The airflow at a given speed 

should be measured for an individual 

head, and total airflow determined by 

multiplying the results by the number of 

fan heads of each type. 

DOE also assessed the potential for 

measuring the power consumption of a 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62534 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

single fan head, and then multiplying by 

the total number of fan heads to 

determine total power consumption. 

DOE found that the power consumption 

measured for one individual fan head 

was 75 percent of the power 

consumption measured when both fan 

heads operated simultaneously. As 

such, measuring the power 

consumption of one fan head and 

multiplying by the number of fan heads 

would significantly overestimate the 

power consumption of both fan heads 

operating simultaneously. Therefore, the 

power consumption at a given speed 

should be measured with all ceiling fan 

heads turned on. It is not necessary to 

measure power consumption at multiple 

airflow sensor arm positions, however. 

An average over 100 seconds with the 

sensor arm in any position is sufficient, 

given the relatively low variability of 

the wattage measurement. 

The effective blade span for a multihead ceiling fan is the blade span of an 

individual fan head, if all fan heads are 

the same size. If the fan heads are of 

varying sizes, the effective blade span is 

the blade span of the largest fan head. 

4. Addition of a Test Method for Ceiling 

Fans Where the Airflow Is Not Directed 

Vertically 

As noted in the Framework Document 

for the ceiling fans standards 

rulemaking, DOE has observed that 

some ceiling fans on the market can be 

oriented in various positions that direct 

the airflow and that sometimes the fans 

cannot be oriented such that airflow is 

directed straight down (i.e., the typical 

configuration).10 A non-vertical 

orientation could result in some of the 

airflow produced being undetected by 

the airflow sensors directly beneath the 

ceiling fan. In response to the 

Framework Document, ALA commented 

that: (1) The manufacturers recommend 

that the velocity of the air must be 

measured perpendicular to the flow of 

the air, and (2) if a ceiling fan, installed 

as intended, is constructed such that the 

airflow is not directed vertically, then 

steps must be taken through special 

fixtures or other acceptable means to 

position the fan head so that the airflow 

is directed vertically for measurement 

purposes. (ALA, No. 39 at p. 11) 

Regarding this issue, DOE conducted 

tests of a fan head with an adjustable tilt 

to explore the impact of measuring 

airflow at an angle other than directly 

downward. In comparison to airflow 

measurements of the fan head directed 

straight down, tilting the fan head at a 

15-degree angle along the A-axis shifted 

the velocity profile along the A–C axis 

and reduced the airflow measured along 

the B–D axis. Average measurements 

from all four sensor axes result in 

airflow measurements that are 6–17 

percent lower than that measured 

directly downward, depending on fan 

speed. The systematically lower 

measurements are not unexpected, since 

most of the airflow in the tilted 

configuration was offset from the center 

of the four axes along the A-axis. Due to 

constraints on the arrangement of the 

sensor axes, sensors are not in an 

appropriate position to measure airflow 

in the direction perpendicular to the A– 

C axis. However, DOE found that using 

average measurements from only those 

sensors which maximize airflow along 

the A–C axis improved agreement with 

measurements of the fan directed 

straight down to within 2–10 percent. 

This calculation assumes that, if sensors 

were placed in the appropriate positions 

along the orthogonal axis, the airflow 

measurements would be the same as 

along the A–C axis. 

For ceiling fans where the airflow is 

not directed vertically, DOE proposes to 

clarify that the ceiling fan head should 

be adjusted such that the airflow is as 

vertical as possible prior to testing so 

that the measured airflow is 

representative of airflow in the direction 

the fan head faces during normal 

operation. The distance between the 

lowest point on the blades and the air 

velocity sensors should be the same as 

for all other low-volume ceiling fans. 

For ceiling fans where a fully vertical 

orientation of airflow cannot be 

achieved, DOE proposes to orient the 

ceiling fan such that any remaining tilt 

is aligned along one of the four sensor 

axes. Instead of measuring the air 

velocity for only those sensors directly 

beneath the ceiling fan, the air velocity 

should be measured at all sensors along 

that axis, as well as the axis oriented 

180 degrees with respect to that axis. 

Using the same total number of sensors 

as would be utilized if the airflow was 

directly downward, the airflow should 

be calculated based on the continuous 

set of sensors with the largest air 

velocity measurements. For example, if 

the tilt is oriented along axis A, air 

velocity measurements should be taken 

for all sensors along the A–C axis. The 

air velocity measurements would 

normally be drawn from a symmetric set 

of sensors for each axis, but because of 

the tilt, the air velocity may be 

maximized for a set of sensors offset by 

several sensor positions along the A 

axis. See Figure 1 for an example. The 

air velocity results from that offset series 

of sensors would be substituted for the 

typical symmetric set in order to 

calculate total airflow, for both the A– 

C axis as well as the B–D axis. The 

effective area used to calculate airflow 

would be the same as for an untilted 

ceiling fan with the same blade span. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62535 

12 IEC 62087 is applicable to television sets, video 

recording equipment, set top boxes, audio 

equipment and multifunction equipment for 

consumer use. 

Given that many of the ceiling fans 

that cannot achieve vertical airflow are 

multi-headed fans, using an adjustable 

mount to achieve a vertical orientation 

may be experimentally impractical. 

Additionally, making significant 

adjustments to the tilt beyond what the 

ceiling fan is capable of achieving when 

installed may not provide an accurate 

representation of expected airflow to a 

potential consumer. For ceiling fans that 

cannot achieve vertical airflow, 

directing the airflow as downward as 

possible, even if the airflow is not 

vertical, may be the most realistic 

representation of expected airflow for 

potential consumers. 

5. Addition of a Test Method for Power 

Consumption in Standby Mode 

DOE proposes to add standby-mode 

power consumption testing for lowvolume and high-volume ceiling fans. 

Specifically, standby-mode testing 

would be applicable to any ceiling fan 

sold with hardware to maintain any of 

the standby functions defined in 42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)(iii)(II). 

For low-volume ceiling fans, DOE’s 

research suggests that standby mode 

typically exists for only those lowvolume ceiling fans that include a radio 

frequency (RF) receiver to facilitate 

interaction with a remote controller. 

DOE understands that high-volume 

ceiling fans, on the other hand, often 

have power consumption in standby 

mode even if they do not include a 

remote control: For example, if they 

utilize a variable frequency drive (VFD) 

to control the speed of the motor. 

Standby testing would be required, and 

included in the metric, for any highvolume ceiling fan with a VFD, as well 

as any high-volume ceiling fan with a 

remote control. DOE requests comment 

on this approach. 

For both low and high-volume ceiling 

fans, the standby test would be 

performed following testing in active 

mode and would require putting the 

ceiling fan in standby mode (if 

controlled by a remote control or other 

sensor) and measuring the input power 

draw. As required by 42 U.S.C. 6295 

(gg)(2)(A), DOE considered the most 

current versions of Standards 62301 and 

62087 of the International 

Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) as a 

basis for standby-mode testing. DOE 

considered IEC 62087 and determined 

that it is not applicable to ceiling fans.12

DOE also considered IEC 62301 (Edition 

2.0, 2011–01). IEC 62301 would require 

the addition of at least 40 minutes to the 

test procedure for those fans subject to 

standby testing. Because this may result 

in an excessive test burden for these 

ceiling fans, DOE proposes to 

incorporate IEC 62301 by reference, but 

reduce the interval of time over which 

testing occurs, as well as the period of 

time prior to standby testing. DOE 

proposes to wait three minutes after 

active mode functionality has been 

switched off to begin the standby-mode 

test and then to collect data for 100 

seconds. By that point in the test 

procedure, the ceiling fan will have 

already been energized for over 30 

minutes for the active mode test (15 

minute warm-up plus more than 15 

minutes for each speed tested), so DOE 

believes additional warm-up time is 

unnecessary. The 100 second duration 

for standby-mode testing matches the 

requirement for active mode testing at 

each sensor arm position. 

Standby power consumed by lowvolume ceiling fans appears to be fairly 

minimal. DOE conducted standby 

power testing on four low-volume 

ceiling fans with remote control 

receivers and found an average standby 

power consumption of approximately 

0.81 watts. Additionally, ALA provided 

comments to the Framework Document 

indicating that low-volume ceiling fans 

with wireless remote controls typically 

have standby power consumption of 

1.4W. (ALA, 39 at pg.13) Given that 

standby power consumption is fairly 

minimal, but does require some 

additional testing, an alternative 

approach to accounting for standby 

power consumption would be to use a 

representative value, such as the 1.4 W 

estimate provided by ALA. However, 

the additional testing for standby mode 

would take less than 5 minutes, be 

conducted immediately after active 

mode testing, and requires no additional 

equipment, so the testing burden would 

be minimal. DOE requests comment on 

its approach to standby-mode testing 

and the appropriateness of testing 

standby power for ceiling fans. 

In the Framework Document for the 

ceiling fans energy conservation 

rulemaking, DOE said that it 

understands that ceiling fans have no 

off-mode power consumption, and thus 

off-mode power consumption would not 

need to be included in the test 

procedure or in the metric, and asked 

for comment.10 DOE received no 

comments indicating that there was any 

off-mode power consumption for ceiling 

fans but did receive a comment 

affirming that there is no off-mode 

power consumption for ceiling fans, 

with ALA commenting that ceiling fans 

consume 0W in off mode. (ALA, No. 39 

at p.13) Zero power consumption in off 

mode is also supported by the UL safety 

standard for electrical fans (UL 507), 

which covers ceiling fans, and which 

says that fans must include an air-gap 

switch which would open the circuit 

and provide no off-mode power 

consumption.6 Because there appears to 

be no off-mode energy consumption for 

ceiling fans, DOE proposes not to 

conduct testing of off-mode power 

consumption. 

G. Certification and Enforcement 

Ceiling fan manufacturers must 

submit certification reports on products 

before they are distributed in commerce 

per 10 CFR 429.12. Components of 

similar design may be substituted 

without additional testing, if the 

substitution does not affect the energy 

consumption of the ceiling fan. (10 CFR 

429.11) Ceiling fan certification reports 

must follow the product-specific 

sampling and reporting requirements 

specified in 10 CFR 429.32. If any 

amended test procedures are finalized, 

and consistent with the dates specified 

for use in section III.B., ceiling fan 

manufacturers would be required to 

calculate ceiling fan efficiency utilizing 

the calculations provided in revised 

Appendix U and follow the reporting 

requirements provided at 10 CFR 429.32 

for each ceiling fan model. 

As discussed in sections III.A.1. and 

III.B., the proposed changes in 

interpretation of the ceiling fan 

definition discussed above would result 

in the applicability of the design 

standards set forth in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 

6295(ff)(1) to the following types of fans 

30 days after the publication of any final 

test procedure adopting such changes in 

interpretation: 

1. Fans suspended from the ceiling using 

a downrod or other means of suspension 

such that the fan is not mounted directly to 

the ceiling; 

2. Fans suspended such that they are 

mounted directly or close to the ceiling; 

3. Fans sold with the option of being 

suspended with or without a downrod; and 

4. Fans capable of producing large volumes 

of airflow. 

In the concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for ceiling fans, 

DOE is considering creating a separate 

product class for highly decorative 

ceiling fans that would be exempt from 

performance standards. The current 

design standards specified in EPCA 

would still apply to such fans. 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has determined that test procedure 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62536 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

13U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of 

Small Business Size Standards (August 22, 2008) 

(Available at: http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/

files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf). 

14The American Lighting Association, list of 

Manufacturers & Representatives (Available at: 

http://www.americanlightingassoc.com/Members/

Resources/Manufacturers-Representatives.aspx). 

15The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and 

the U.S. Department of Energy, ENERGY STAR 

Ceiling Fans—Product Databases for Ceiling Fans 

(Available at: http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?

fuseaction=find_a_product.showProductGroup&

pgw_code=CF). 

16The California Energy Commission, Appliance 

Database for Ceiling Fans (Available at: http://www.

appliances.energy.ca.gov/QuickSearch.aspx). 

17The Federal Trade Commission, Appliance 

Energy Databases for Ceiling Fans (Available at: 

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/eande/

appliances/ceilfan.htm). 

rulemakings do not constitute 

‘‘significant regulatory actions’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 58 

FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, 

this regulatory action was not subject to 

review under the Executive Order by the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation 

of a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) 

for any rule that by law must be 

proposed for public comment, unless 

the agency certifies that the rule, if 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As required by 

Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities in 

Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003, to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the DOE 

rulemaking process. (68 FR 7990 (Feb. 

19, 2003)). DOE has made its procedures 

and policies available on the Office of 

the General Counsel’s Web site: http:// 

energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. 

DOE reviewed today’s proposed rule 

under the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) and the policies 

and procedures published on February 

19, 2003. The proposed rule prescribes 

test procedure amendments that would 

be used to determine compliance with 

any amended energy conservation 

standards that DOE may prescribe for 

ceiling fans. As discussed in more detail 

below, DOE found that although the 

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 

requires testing of ceiling fans, because 

DOE does not currently require 

efficiency testing of ceiling fans, all 

manufacturers, including small 

manufacturers, could potentially 

experience a financial burden if new 

testing becomes required as a result of 

the concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking. While examining 

this issue, DOE determined that it could 

not certify that the proposed rule, if 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant effect on a substantial 

number of small entities. Therefore, 

DOE has prepared an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis (IRFA) for this 

rulemaking. The IRFA describes 

potential impacts on small businesses 

associated with ceiling fan testing 

requirements. DOE seeks comment on 

the discussion below and will develop 

a final regulatory flexibility analysis 

(FRFA) for any final test procedures 

developed in this test procedure 

rulemaking. 

DOE has transmitted a copy of this 

IRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy 

of the Small Business Administration 

for review. 

(1) Description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered. 

A description of the reasons why DOE 

is considering this test procedure are 

stated elsewhere in the preamble and 

not repeated here. 

(2) Succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

proposed rule. 

The objectives of and legal basis for 

the proposed rule are stated elsewhere 

in the preamble and not repeated here. 

(3) Description of and, where feasible, 

an estimate of the number of small 

entities to which the proposed rule will 

apply. 

For the manufacturers of the covered 

ceiling fan products, the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) has set a size 

threshold, which defines those entities 

classified as ‘‘small businesses’’ for the 

purposes of the statute. DOE used the 

SBA’s small business size standards to 

determine whether any small entities 

would be subject to the requirements of 

the rule. 13 CFR part 121. The size 

standards are listed by North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code and industry description and are 

available at: http://www.sba.gov/sites/

default/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. 

Ceiling fan manufacturing is classified 

under NAICS code 335210, ‘‘Small 

Electrical Appliance Manufacturing’’ or 

NAICS code 333412, ‘‘Industrial and 

Commercial Fan and Blower 

Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a 

threshold for NAICS classification for 

335210 and 333412 of 750 employees or 

less and 500 employees or less, 

respectively.13 DOE reviewed ALA’s list 

of ceiling fan manufacturers,14 the 

ENERGY STAR Product Databases for 

Ceiling Fans,15 the California Energy 

Commission’s Appliance Database for 

Ceiling Fans,16 and the Federal Trade 

Commission’s Appliance Energy 

Database for Ceiling Fans.17 Based on 

this review, using data on the 

companies for which DOE was able to 

obtain information on the numbers of 

employees, DOE estimates that there are 

between 25 and 35 small business 

manufacturers of low-volume ceiling 

fans. To determine the number of small 

business manufacturers of high-volume 

ceiling fans, DOE reviewed SBA’s Web 

site, high-volume ceiling fan 

manufacturers Web sites, and company 

reports from Hoovers.com, in addition 

to speaking with industry experts. Based 

on this review, DOE estimates that there 

are between 15 and 25 small business 

manufacturers of high-volume ceiling 

fans. DOE invites interested parties to 

comment on the estimated number of 

small business manufacturers of ceiling 

fans. 

(4) Description of the projected 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule. 

In this test procedure NOPR, DOE 

proposes to reinterpret the statutory 

definition of a ceiling fan to include 

hugger ceiling fans. DOE also proposes 

that high-volume fans meet the 

definition of a ceiling fan. The proposed 

changes in interpretation of the ceiling 

fan definition discussed above would 

result in the applicability of the design 

standards set forth in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 

6295(ff)(1) to the following types of fans 

30 days after the publication of any final 

test procedure adopting such changes in 

interpretation: 

1. Fans suspended from the ceiling using 

a downrod or other means of suspension 

such that the fan is not mounted directly to 

the ceiling; 

2. Fans suspended such that they are 

mounted directly or close to the ceiling; 

3. Fans sold with the option of being 

suspended with or without a downrod; and 

4. Fans capable of producing large volumes 

of airflow. 

DOE research indicates that all ceiling 

fans currently on the market, including 

hugger ceiling fans and high-volume 

ceiling fans, appear to meet the EPCA 

design standards. DOE conducted an 

analysis of Hansen Wholesale, an online 

wholesaler that sells over 2000 models 

of ceiling fans, including a wide variety 

of ceiling fan brands. Hansen Wholesale 

provides product specifications on its 

Web site, including the number of 

speeds and whether a ceiling fan is 

reversible. DOE examined all of the 

ceiling fans that were self-identified as 

hugger ceiling fans and found that they 

all had fan controls separate from 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62537 

lighting controls, were capable of being 

operated at more than one speed, and 

were capable of being operated in 

reverse. 

For high-volume ceiling fans, DOE 

searched for product specifications on 

the Web sites of manufacturers of highvolume large-diameter ceiling fans and 

from Web sites of retailers of highvolume small-diameter ceiling fans. 

Only one high-volume ceiling fan was 

found with a light kit, and the fan 

controls were separate from the lighting 

controls for that fan. All high-volume 

ceiling fans appeared to be capable of 

operating at more than one speed 

(typically with an adjustable speed 

control). High-volume ceiling fans are 

primarily sold for industrial purposes 

and are therefore not subject to the 

requirement to be capable of operating 

in reverse. 

Based on this research, DOE does not 

expect any cost of complying with the 

design requirements for manufacturers 

of hugger or high-volume ceiling fans. 

DOE proposes measures to limit the 

burden of testing on all manufacturers, 

including small business manufacturers, 

while providing a representative 

measurement of ceiling fan efficiency 

for consumers. Low-volume ceiling fans 

(excluding hugger fans) are currently 

required to test at high speed due to 

FTC’s labeling requirement for ceiling 

fans. As discussed in more detail 

elsewhere in the preamble, DOE 

proposes to specify that low speed is to 

be tested as well as high speed to have 

a test procedure that is representative of 

typical use. DOE estimates that the cost 

to test at low speed, in addition to high 

speed, represents an additional cost of 

$75 (or $150 per basic model) above the 

high-speed test cost. 

DOE notes that if the concurrent 

rulemaking regarding energy 

conservation standards for ceiling fans 

results in efficiency performance 

standards, DOE would require testing 

for certification of two ceiling fans per 

basic model, the minimum sample size 

required by 10 CFR 429.11. To 

determine the potential cost of the 

proposed test procedure on small 

ceiling fan manufacturers under a 

potential energy conservation standard 

for ceiling fans, DOE estimated the cost 

of testing two ceiling fans. The cost of 

testing was then multiplied over the 

estimated number of basic models 

produced by a small manufacturer. The 

estimated cost of testing is discussed in 

further detail below. 

In today’s test procedure proposal, 

DOE has proposed to reinterpret the 

statutory definition of a ceiling fan such 

that it would include hugger ceiling 

fans. The proposed test method for 

hugger ceiling fans would be the same 

as the proposed test method for all other 

low-volume ceiling fans. 

DOE estimated the cost to test a lowvolume ceiling fan based on estimates 

from third-party testing facilities of the 

cost to perform the current ENERGY 

STAR test procedure for ceiling fans, 

which is similar to DOE’s proposed test 

procedure, and the changes in cost 

associated with the key differences 

between the two test procedures. DOE’s 

proposed test procedure for low-volume 

ceiling fans differs from the current 

ENERGY STAR test procedure in that it 

(1) requires testing at only two fan 

speeds instead of three, (2) requires the 

use of a false ceiling, (3) does not 

require the use of a test cylinder, (4) 

requires less warm up time before 

testing at low speed, and (5) requires 

standby-mode testing. 

In aggregate, DOE estimates that these 

differences will result in a lower test 

cost for the proposed DOE test 

procedure for low-volume ceiling fans 

when compared to the ENERGY STAR 

test procedure for ceiling fans. Testing 

at only two speeds instead of three 

yields a total test time that is 

approximately 35 minutes shorter than 

the ENERGY STAR test procedure. The 

proposed test procedure would also add 

a false ceiling to the experimental setup 

which, as discussed in section III.E.3, 

requires a one-time lab cost to install a 

false ceiling in a testing facility. Based 

on the materials employed and test 

quotes from third-party labs, DOE 

estimates the cost to construct and 

install a false ceiling is $1000 or less. 

Because the same false ceiling could be 

used to test all low-volume ceiling fans, 

the false ceiling could be left in place 

and would not add substantial test cost 

thereafter. 

DOE’s proposed test procedure, which 

would not require use of a test cylinder, 

also eliminates any potential costs 

associated with purchasing new test 

cylinders. If the test procedure required 

the use of test cylinders, then a new 

cylinder would be necessary to test any 

ceiling fan with a diameter that does not 

correspond to one of the cylinders in a 

test lab’s existing inventory. Based on 

discussions with third-party testing 

facilities, DOE estimates that new test 

cylinders would cost approximately 

$2000–3000 per cylinder. By not using 

a cylinder, these costs will be avoided. 

Not requiring a test cylinder also 

shortens the test time of DOE’s proposed 

test procedure relative to ENERGY 

STAR’s test procedure for all lowvolume ceiling fans, because time is not 

required to put a test cylinder in place 

for each test (estimated to take 15 

minutes). Additionally, DOE’s proposed 

test procedure only requires 15 minutes 

of warm up time before testing at low 

speed compared to 30 minutes in the 

ENERGY STAR test procedure, further 

reducing the relative amount of time 

required for DOE’s proposed test 

procedure by 15 minutes. In total, DOE 

estimates that the typical time to 

perform the proposed test procedure 

will be shorter by 65 minutes compared 

to ENERGY STAR’s test procedure. 

DOE’s proposed test procedure does 

add a requirement for standby-mode 

testing, for ceiling fans with standby 

functionality. However, as noted in 

section III.F.5, the additional testing for 

standby would take less than 5 minutes, 

be conducted immediately after active 

mode testing, and requires no additional 

equipment, so the testing burden would 

be minimal. 

Based on all of these differences with 

respect to the ENERGY STAR test 

procedure, and estimates from thirdparty testing facilities of the labor costs 

associated with these differences, DOE 

estimates that the proposed test 

procedure for low-volume ceiling fans 

will cost between $600 and $1800 per 

test, for a total of $1200 to $3600 per 

basic model of ceiling fan for standard 

and hugger ceiling fans. For multimount ceiling fans, DOE estimates that 

the test cost will be approximately 

double the cost for standard and hugger 

ceiling fans. DOE also estimates that 

multi-mount ceiling fans represent 

approximately 20% of ceiling fan basic 

models for small business 

manufacturers. The test method for 

multi-head ceiling fans may require 

somewhat more time to set up compared 

to the time required for a single-headed 

fan, and DOE estimates the cost to be 

between $1300 and $2000 per test, or 

$2600 to $4000 per basic model. 

However, DOE notes that multi-head 

ceiling fans appear to represent 5% or 

less of ceiling fan basic models for small 

business manufacturers. Based on best 

estimates from third party testing 

facilities, DOE estimates that a typical 

test for a single-headed ceiling fan 

would cost approximately $950, or 

$1900 per basic model for standard or 

hugger ceiling fans, and $3800 per basic 

model for multi-mount ceiling fans. 

For the approximately 30 small 

business manufacturers of low-volume 

ceiling fans that DOE identified, the 

number of basic models produced per 

manufacturer varies significantly from 

one to approximately 80. Therefore, 

based on the test cost per ceiling fan 

basic model, the testing cost in the first 

year would range from approximately 

$1900 to $182,400 for small 

manufacturers of ceiling fans. DOE 

expects this cost to be lower in 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62538 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

subsequent years because only new or 

redesigned ceiling fan models would 

need to be tested. 

DOE estimated the cost to test a highvolume ceiling fan based on discussions 

with testing facilities capable of 

performing the AMCA 230 test 

procedure as well as cost estimates 

based on the time and labor costs 

necessary to perform the proposed test 

procedure on larger high-volume ceiling 

fans. DOE estimates that the one-time 

cost for a lab to buy a load-cell, a 

fabricated load-cell frame, power meter, 

and one air velocity sensor is 

approximately $4500. DOE estimates 

that the proposed test procedure for 

high-volume ceiling fans will cost 

manufacturers between $1000 and 

$3500 per test, for a total of $2000 to 

$7000 per basic model of ceiling fan. 

Based on the mid-point of the testing 

range, DOE estimates that the typical 

test would cost $2250 per test, or $4500 

per basic model. 

For the approximately 15–25 small 

business manufacturers of high-volume 

ceiling fans that DOE identified, the 

number of basic models produced per 

manufacturer varies from one to 30. 

Therefore, based on the test cost per 

ceiling fan basic model, the testing cost 

in the first year would range from 

approximately $4500 to $135,000 for 

small manufacturers of high-volume 

ceiling fans. DOE expects this cost to be 

lower in subsequent years because only 

new or redesigned ceiling fan models 

would need to be tested. 

DOE used company reports from 

Hoovers.com, information from 

manufacturers’ Web sites and feedback 

from manufacturers to estimate the 

revenue for the small business 

manufacturers of low and high-volume 

ceiling fans identified. The median 

revenue of the small business 

manufacturers of low-volume ceiling 

fans is approximately $15M. Relative to 

the median revenue for a small business 

manufacturer, the total testing cost 

ranges from 0.01 percent to 1 percent of 

the median revenue. The median 

revenue of the small business 

manufacturers of high-volume ceiling 

fans is approximately $8M. Relative to 

the median revenue for a small business 

manufacturer of high-volume ceiling 

fans, the total testing cost ranges from 

0.05 percent to 1.5 percent of the 

median revenue. 

For both low and high-volume ceiling 

fans, DOE does not expect that small 

manufacturers would necessarily have 

fewer basic models than large 

manufacturers, because ceiling fans are 

highly customized throughout the 

industry. A small manufacturer could 

have the same total cost of testing as a 

large manufacturer, but this cost would 

be a higher percentage of a small 

manufacturer’s annual revenues. DOE 

requests comments on its analysis of 

burden to small businesses for testing 

ceiling fans according to the proposed 

test procedure. 

(5) Relevant Federal rules which may 

duplicate, overlap or conflict with the 

proposed rule. 

DOE is not aware of any other Federal 

rules that would duplicate, overlap or 

conflict with the rule being proposed. 

(6) Description of any significant 

alternatives to the proposed rule. 

DOE considered a number of industry 

and governmental test procedures that 

measure the efficiency of ceiling fans to 

develop the proposed test procedure in 

today’s rulemaking. There appear to be 

two common approaches to testing 

ceiling fans: An approach based on 

using air velocity sensors to calculate 

airflow, such as the current DOE test 

procedure for ceiling fans, ENERGY 

STAR’s test procedure, and CAN/CSA– 

C814–10, and an approach based on 

using a load cell to measure thrust, such 

as AMCA 230. 

In principle, either approach could be 

used to measure the airflow efficiency of 

all ceiling fans, but maintaining 

consistency with industry practice 

would minimize test burden for all 

ceiling fan manufacturers. Though a 

load-cell based approach appears to be 

a potentially simpler method of 

estimating airflow efficiency, in 

industry, low-volume ceiling fans have 

historically been tested according to the 

air-velocity sensor based approach. 

High-volume ceiling fans, on the other 

hand, have historically been tested 

according to the load-cell based 

approach. It also appears to be costprohibitive to scale up the air-velocity 

sensor based approach to the larger 

diameter high-volume ceiling fans 

currently on the market given the 

number of sensors that would be 

required to cover ceiling fans 24 feet in 

diameter and the cost of constructing an 

appropriate rotating sensor arm. 

DOE seeks comment and information 

on any alternative test methods that, 

consistent with EPCA requirements, 

would reduce the economic impact of 

the rule on small entities. DOE will 

consider the feasibility of such 

alternatives and determine whether they 

should be incorporated into the final 

rule. 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

Manufacturers of ceiling fans must 

certify to DOE that their products 

comply with all applicable energy 

conservation standards. In certifying 

compliance, manufacturers must test 

their products according to the DOE test 

procedure for ceiling fans, including 

any amendments adopted for the test 

procedure on the date that compliance 

is required. DOE has established 

regulations for the certification and 

recordkeeping requirements for all 

covered consumer products and 

commercial equipment, including 

ceiling fans. 76 FR 12422 (Mar. 7, 2011). 

This rule contains a collection-ofinformation requirement that is subject 

to review and approval by OMB under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). 

This requirement has been approved by 

OMB under control number 1910–1400. 

The public reporting burden for 

certification for energy and water 

conservation standards is estimated to 

average 20 hours per response, 

including the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection of information. 

Send comments regarding this burden 

estimate, or any other aspect of this data 

collection, including suggestions for 

reducing the burden, to DOE (see 

ADDRESSES) and by email to Chad_S_

Whiteman@omb.eop.gov. 

Notwithstanding any other provision of 

the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this proposed rule, DOE proposes 

test procedure amendments that it 

expects will be used to develop and 

implement future energy conservation 

standards for ceiling fans. DOE has 

determined that this rule falls into a 

class of actions that are categorically 

excluded from review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE’s 

implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 

1021. Specifically, this proposed rule 

would amend the existing test 

procedures without affecting the 

amount, quality, or distribution of 

energy usage, and, therefore, would not 

result in any environmental impacts. 

Thus, this rulemaking is covered by 

Categorical Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR 

part 1021, subpart D, which applies to 

any rulemaking that interprets or 

amends an existing rule without 

changing the environmental effect of 

that rule. Accordingly, neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62539 

environmental impact statement is 

required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999), imposes 

certain requirements on Federal 

agencies formulating and implementing 

policies or regulations that preempt 

State law or that have Federalism 

implications. The Executive Order 

requires agencies to examine the 

constitutional and statutory authority 

supporting any action that would limit 

the policymaking discretion of the 

States and to carefully assess the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have Federalism implications. On 

March 14, 2000, DOE published a 

statement of policy describing the 

intergovernmental consultation process 

it will follow in the development of 

such regulations. (65 FR 13735 (Mar. 14, 

2000)). DOE has examined this 

proposed rule and has tentatively 

determined that it would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. EPCA governs and 

prescribes Federal preemption of State 

regulations as to energy conservation for 

the products that are the subject of 

today’s proposed rule. States can 

petition DOE for exemption from such 

preemption to the extent, and based on 

criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 

6297(d)) No further action is required by 

Executive Order 13132. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

Regarding the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), 

imposes on Federal agencies the general 

duty to adhere to the following 

requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity; (2) write 

regulations to minimize litigation; (3) 

provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct rather than a general 

standard; and (4) promote simplification 

and burden reduction. Regarding the 

review required by section 3(a), section 

3(b) of Executive Order 12988 

specifically requires that Executive 

agencies make every reasonable effort to 

ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly 

specifies the preemptive effect, if any; 

(2) clearly specifies any effect on 

existing Federal law or regulation; (3) 

provides a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct while promoting 

simplification and burden reduction; (4) 

specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) 

adequately defines key terms; and (6) 

addresses other important issues 

affecting clarity and general 

draftsmanship under any guidelines 

issued by the Attorney General. Section 

3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires 

Executive agencies to review regulations 

in light of applicable standards in 

sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine 

whether they are met or it is 

unreasonable to meet one or more of 

them. DOE has completed the required 

review and tentatively determined that, 

to the extent permitted by law, the 

proposed rule meets the relevant 

standards of Executive Order 12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires 

each Federal agency to assess the effects 

of Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments and the 

private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 

201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a 

proposed regulatory action likely to 

result in a rule that may cause the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector of $100 million or more 

in any one year (adjusted annually for 

inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires 

a Federal agency to publish a written 

statement that estimates the resulting 

costs, benefits, and other effects on the 

national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), 

(b)). The UMRA also requires a Federal 

agency to develop an effective process 

to permit timely input by elected 

officers of State, local, and Tribal 

governments on a proposed ‘‘significant 

intergovernmental mandate,’’ and 

requires an agency plan for giving notice 

and opportunity for timely input to 

potentially affected small governments 

before establishing any requirements 

that might significantly or uniquely 

affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE 

published a statement of policy on its 

process for intergovernmental 

consultation under UMRA. (62 FR 

12820 (Mar. 18, 1997)). (This policy is 

also available at http://energy.gov/gc/

office-general-counsel.) DOE examined 

today’s proposed rule according to 

UMRA and its statement of policy and 

has tentatively determined that the rule 

contains neither an intergovernmental 

mandate, nor a mandate that may result 

in the expenditure by State, local, and 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of $100 million or 

more in any year. Accordingly, no 

further assessment or analysis is 

required under UMRA. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

rule would not have any impact on the 

autonomy or integrity of the family as 

an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 

concluded that it is not necessary to 

prepare a Family Policymaking 

Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12630, 

‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference 

with Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (Mar. 18, 1988), 

DOE has determined that this proposed 

regulation would not result in any 

takings that might require compensation 

under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides 

for Federal agencies to review most 

disseminations of information to the 

public under information quality 

guidelines established by each agency 

pursuant to general guidelines issued by 

OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published 

at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and 

DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 

FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has 

reviewed today’s proposed rule under 

the OMB and DOE guidelines and has 

concluded that it is consistent with 

applicable policies in those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to OIRA at OMB, a 

Statement of Energy Effects for any 

proposed significant energy action. A 

‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as 

any action by an agency that 

promulgates or is expected to lead to 

promulgation of a final rule, and that: 

(1) Is a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy; or 

(3) is designated by the Administrator of 

OIRA as a significant energy action. For 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62540 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

any proposed significant energy action, 

the agency must give a detailed 

statement of any adverse effects on 

energy supply, distribution, or use 

should the proposal be implemented, 

and of reasonable alternatives to the 

action and their expected benefits on 

energy supply, distribution, and use. 

Today’s regulatory action to amend 

the test procedure for measuring the 

energy efficiency of ceiling fans is not 

a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866 or any successor 

order. Moreover, it would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy, nor has it 

been designated as a significant energy 

action by the Administrator of OIRA. 

Therefore, it is not a significant energy 

action, and, accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a Statement of Energy Effects 

for this rulemaking. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the Department 

of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 

91; 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), DOE must 

comply with all laws applicable to the 

former Federal Energy Administration, 

including section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 

(Pub. L. 93–275), as amended by the 

Federal Energy Administration 

Authorization Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95– 

70). (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA) Section 32 

essentially provides in relevant part 

that, where a proposed rule authorizes 

or requires use of commercial standards, 

the notice of proposed rulemaking must 

inform the public of the use and 

background of such standards. In 

addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to 

consult with the Attorney General and 

the Chairman of the FTC concerning the 

impact of the commercial or industry 

standards on competition. 

Today’s proposed rule would 

incorporate testing methods contained 

in the following commercial standard: 

ANSI/AMCA Standard 230–12, 

‘‘Laboratory Methods of Testing Air 

Circulating Fans for Rating and 

Certification.’’ The Department has 

evaluated this standard and is unable to 

conclude whether it fully complies with 

the requirements of section 32(b) of the 

FEAA, (i.e., that it was developed in a 

manner that fully provides for public 

participation, comment, and review). 

DOE will consult with the Attorney 

General and the Chairman of the FTC 

concerning the impact on competition 

of requiring manufacturers to use the 

test methods contained in this standard 

prior to prescribing a final rule. 

V. Public Participation 

A. Attendance at the Public Meeting 

The time, date and location of the 

public meeting are listed in the DATES

and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning 

of this document. If you plan to attend 

the public meeting, please notify Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. As 

explained in the ADDRESSES section, 

foreign nationals visiting DOE 

Headquarters are subject to advance 

security screening procedures. Any 

foreign national wishing to participate 

in the meeting should advise DOE of 

this fact as soon as possible by 

contacting Ms. Brenda Edwards to 

initiate the necessary procedures. 

In addition, you can attend the public 

meeting via webinar. Webinar 

registration information, participant 

instructions, and information about the 

capabilities available to webinar 

participants will be published on DOE’s 

Web site at: http://

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/

appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx/

ruleid/65. Participants are responsible 

for ensuring their systems are 

compatible with the webinar software. 

B. Procedure for Submitting Requests To 

Speak and Prepared General Statements 

for Distribution 

Any person who has an interest in the 

topics addressed in this notice, or who 

is representative of a group or class of 

persons that has an interest in these 

issues, may request an opportunity to 

make an oral presentation at the public 

meeting. Such persons may handdeliver requests to speak to the address 

shown in the ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this notice of proposed 

rulemaking between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. Requests may also be sent by 

mail or email to Ms. Brenda Edwards, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121, or 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. Persons 

who wish to speak should include in 

their request a computer diskette or CD– 

ROM in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, 

PDF, or text (ASCII) file format that 

briefly describes the nature of their 

interest in this rulemaking and the 

topics they wish to discuss. Such 

persons should also provide a daytime 

telephone number where they can be 

reached. 

DOE requests persons selected to 

make an oral presentation to submit an 

advance copy of their statements at least 

one week before the public meeting. 

DOE may permit persons who cannot 

supply an advance copy of their 

statement to participate, if those persons 

have made advance alternative 

arrangements with the Building 

Technologies Office. As necessary, 

requests to give an oral presentation 

should ask for such alternative 

arrangements. 

Any person who has plans to present 

a prepared general statement may 

request that copies of his or her 

statement be made available at the 

public meeting. Such persons may 

submit requests, along with an advance 

electronic copy of their statement in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format, to the appropriate address 

shown in the ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this notice of proposed 

rulemaking. The request and advance 

copy of statements must be received at 

least one week before the public 

meeting and may be emailed, handdelivered, or sent by mail. DOE prefers 

to receive requests and advance copies 

via email. Please include a telephone 

number to enable DOE staff to make a 

follow-up contact, if needed. 

C. Conduct of the Public Meeting 

DOE will designate a DOE official to 

preside at the public meeting and may 

also use a professional facilitator to aid 

discussion. The meeting will not be a 

judicial or evidentiary-type public 

hearing, but DOE will conduct it in 

accordance with section 336 of EPCA 

(42 U.S.C. 6306). A court reporter will 

be present to record the proceedings and 

prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the 

right to schedule the order of 

presentations and to establish the 

procedures governing the conduct of the 

public meeting. There shall not be 

discussion of proprietary information, 

costs or prices, market share, or other 

commercial matters regulated by U.S. 

anti-trust laws. After the public meeting, 

interested parties may submit further 

comments on the proceedings, as well 

as on any aspect of the rulemaking, until 

the end of the comment period. 

The public meeting will be conducted 

in an informal, conference style. DOE 

will present summaries of comments 

received before the public meeting, 

allow time for prepared general 

statements by participants, and 

encourage all interested parties to share 

their views on issues affecting this 

rulemaking. Each participant will be 

allowed to make a general statement 

(within time limits determined by DOE), 

before the discussion of specific topics. 

DOE will allow, as time permits, other 

participants to comment briefly on any 

general statements. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62541 

At the end of all prepared statements 

on a topic, DOE will permit participants 

to clarify their statements briefly and 

comment on statements made by others. 

Participants should be prepared to 

answer questions by DOE and by other 

participants concerning these issues. 

DOE representatives may also ask 

questions of participants concerning 

other matters relevant to this 

rulemaking. The official conducting the 

public meeting will accept additional 

comments or questions from those 

attending, as time permits. The 

presiding official will announce any 

further procedural rules or modification 

of the above procedures that may be 

needed for the proper conduct of the 

public meeting. 

A transcript of the public meeting will 

be included in the docket, which can be 

viewed as described in the Docket 

section at the beginning of this notice 

and will be accessible on the DOE Web 

site. In addition, any person may buy a 

copy of the transcript from the 

transcribing reporter. 

D. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this proposed 

rule before or after the public meeting, 

but no later than the date provided in 

the DATES section at the beginning of 

this proposed rule. Interested parties 

may submit comments using any of the 

methods described in the ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this notice. 

Submitting comments via 

www.regulations.gov. The 

www.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, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. 

Otherwise, persons viewing comments 

will see only first and last names, 

organization names, correspondence 

containing comments, and any 

documents submitted with the 

comments. 

Do not submit to www.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 

www.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 www.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 www.regulations.gov 

provides after you have successfully 

uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery/courier, or mail. Comments and 

documents submitted via email, hand 

delivery/courier, or mail also will be 

posted to www.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 in 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/

courier, please provide all items on a 

CD, if feasible, in which case it is not 

necessary to submit printed copies. No 

telefacsimiles (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, 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. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, 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/courier 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. 

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). 

E. 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 is reinterpreting the statutory 

definition of a ceiling fan to include hugger 

ceiling fans and clarifying that the definition 

includes multi-mount ceiling fans. DOE notes 

that CFLKs attached to hugger ceiling fans 

would become covered CFLKs under this 

reinterpretation. DOE invites comment on 

this reinterpretation and clarification. 

2. DOE is also clarifying that high-volume 

ceiling fans are considered ceiling fans and 

covered under this rulemaking. DOE invites 

comment on this clarification. 

3. DOE is proposing interpreting 

centrifugal fans to fall outside of the scope 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62542 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

of this rulemaking. DOE invites comment on 

this interpretation. 

4. DOE invites comment on the proposed 

definitions for low-volume ceiling fans, highvolume ceiling fans, hugger ceiling fans, 

standard ceiling fans, and multi-mount 

ceiling fans. 

5. DOE seeks comment on its proposed 

approach to incorporate standby power 

consumption into the ceiling fan efficiency 

metric. 

6. DOE seeks comment on its proposed 

approach to assign all standby power 

consumption for a remote receiver that 

controls both a ceiling fan and light kit to the 

ceiling fan. 

7. DOE seeks comment on its proposed 

operating hours for calculating ceiling fan 

efficiency for low-volume ceiling fans. 

8. DOE seeks comment and any available 

data on operating hours for high-volume 

ceiling fans. 

9. DOE seeks comment on its proposed 

approach to test at high and low speed for 

low-volume ceiling fans. 

10. DOE seeks comment on its proposed 

approach to test high-volume fans at high 

speed only. 

11. DOE seeks comment on its proposal to 

add a false ceiling to the experimental setup 

for all low-volume ceiling fan testing. 

12. DOE seeks comment and data on how 

ceiling fans with more than one mounting 

option that would meet the definition of a 

standard ceiling fan are configured in the 

field. DOE also seeks comment and data on 

how hugger ceiling fans with more than one 

mounting option are configured in field. 

13. DOE seeks comment on the proposed 

modifications to the testing room dimensions 

for high-volume ceiling fans. DOE 

specifically requests information on how 

manufacturers currently test large-diameter, 

high-volume ceiling fans, as well as the 

availability of suitable third-party testing 

facilities that can conduct the proposed test 

procedure and the ability to develop such 

facilities. 

14. DOE seeks comment on whether 

manufacturers should be required to test 

multi-mount ceiling fans in the standard 

configuration, hugger configuration, both 

configurations, or all configurations for 

which they are capable of being installed. 

15. DOE invites interested parties to 

comment on the estimated number of small 

business manufacturers of ceiling fans. 

16. DOE requests comment on whether 

there are currently any hugger ceiling fan or 

high-volume ceiling fan features that are not 

in compliance with EPCA design standards 

for ceiling fans. 

17. DOE requests comments on its analysis 

of burden to small businesses for testing 

ceiling fans according to the proposed test 

procedure. 

18. DOE seeks comment and information 

on any alternative test methods that, 

consistent with the statutory requirements, 

would reduce the economic impact of the 

rule on small entities. 

19. Several comments were received in 

response to the Framework Document for the 

ceiling fans energy conservation standards 

rulemaking suggesting that the testing could 

be improved if there were inter-lab 

calibration between testing facilities. DOE 

seeks comment on how calibration between 

testing facilities could be facilitated. 

VI. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of today’s notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

List of Subjects 

10 CFR Part 429 

Confidential business information, 

Energy conservation, Household 

appliances, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Small 

businesses. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

19, 2014. 

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, Subchapter 

D of Title 10, Code of Federal 

Regulations, as set forth below: 

PART 429—CERTIFICATION, 

COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

■ 2. Section 429.32 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 429.32 Ceiling fans. 

(a) Determination of represented 

value. Manufacturers must determine 

the represented value, which includes 

the certified rating, for each basic model 

of ceiling fan by: 

(1) Units to be tested. 

(i) The requirements of § 429.11 are 

applicable to ceiling fans; and 

(ii) For each basic model of ceiling fan 

selected for testing, a sample of 

sufficient size shall be randomly 

selected and tested to ensure that— 

(A) Any represented value of the 

efficiency or airflow shall be less than 

or equal to the lower of: 

(1) The mean of the sample, where: 

And x ̄ is the sample mean; n is the 

number of samples; and xi is the ith

sample; or 

(2) The lower 90 percent confidence 

limit (LCL) of the true mean divided by 

0.9, where: 

And x ̄ is the sample mean; s is the 

sample standard deviation; n is the 

number of samples; and t0.90 is the t 

statistic for a 90% one-tailed confidence 

interval with n¥1 degrees of freedom 

(from Appendix A to subpart B); and 

(B) Any represented value of the 

wattage shall be greater than or equal to 

the higher of: 

(1) The mean of the sample, where: 

And x ̄ is the sample mean; n is the 

number of samples; and xi is the ith

sample; or 

(2) The upper 95 percent confidence 

limit (UCL) of the true mean divided by 

1.1, where: 

And x ̄ is the sample mean; s is the 

sample standard deviation; n is the 

number of samples; and t0.95 is the t 

statistic for a 95% one-tailed confidence 

interval with n¥1 degrees of freedom 

(from Appendix A to subpart B). 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2461 note. 

■ 4. Section 430.2 is amended by adding 

the definitions for ‘‘high-volume ceiling 

fan,’’ ‘‘hugger ceiling fan,’’ ‘‘low-volume 

ceiling fan,’’ ‘‘multi-mount ceiling fan,’’ 

and ‘‘standard ceiling fan’’ in 

alphabetical order to read as follows: 

§ 430.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

High-volume ceiling fan means a 

ceiling fan that: 

(1) Is greater than 7 feet in diameter; 

or 

(2) Has a blade thickness of less than 

3.2 mm at the edge or a maximum tip 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.007</GPH> EP17OC14.008</GPH> EP17OC14.009</GPH> EP17OC14.010</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62543 

speed that exceeds the threshold in the 

table in the definition of low-volume 

ceiling fan in this section and has a 

maximum airflow volume greater than 

5,000 CFM. 

* * * * * 

Hugger ceiling fan means a ceiling fan 

where the lowest point on the fan blades 

is no more than ten inches from the 

ceiling. 

* * * * * 

Low-volume ceiling fan means a 

ceiling fan that: 

(1) Is less than or equal to 7 feet in 

diameter; and 

(2) Has a blade thickness greater than 

or equal to 3.2 mm at the edge and a 

maximum tip speed less than or equal 

to the limit in the table in this 

definition, or has a maximum airflow 

volume less than or equal to 5,000 CFM. 

LOW-VOLUME CEILING FANS, 7 FEET OR LESS IN DIAMETER

Airflow Direction * 

Thickness (t) 

of edges of blades 

Maximum speed 

at tip of blades 

Mm (inch) m/s (feet per minute) 

Downward-Only ....................................................................... 4.8 > t ≥ 3.2 (3/16 > t ≥ 1/8) 16.3 (3200) 

Downward-Only ....................................................................... t ≥ 4.8 (t ≥ 3/16) 20.3 (4000) 

Reversible ................................................................................ 4.8 > t ≥ 3.2 (3/16 > t ≥ 1/8) 12.2 (2400) 

Reversible ................................................................................ t ≥ 4.8 (t ≥ 3/16) 16.3 (3200) 

* The ‘‘downward-only’’ and ‘‘reversible’’ airflow directions are mutually exclusive; therefore, a ceiling fan that can only produce airflow in the 

downward direction need only meet the ‘‘downward-only’’ blade edge thickness and tip speed requirements and a ceiling fan that can produce 

airflow in the downward and upward directions need only meet the ‘‘reversible’’ requirements. 

* * * * * 

Multi-mount ceiling fan means a 

ceiling fan that can be mounted in both 

the standard and hugger ceiling fan 

configurations. 

* * * * * 

Standard ceiling fan means a ceiling 

fan where the lowest point on the fan 

blades is more than ten inches from the 

ceiling. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 430.3 is amended by: 

■ a. Adding paragraph (d)(19); and 

■ b. Removing in paragraph (o)(4), 

‘‘appendices C1, D1, D2, G, H, I, J2, N, 

O, P, and X to subpart B’’ and adding 

in its place, ‘‘appendices C1, D1, D2, G, 

H, I, J2, U, N, O, P, and X to subpart B 

of this part’’. 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 430.3 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(19) ANSI/AMCA 230–12 (‘‘AMCA 

230’’), Air Movement and Control 

Association Laboratory Methods of 

Testing Air Circulating Fans for Rating 

and Certification, approved February 22, 

2012, IBR approved for appendix U to 

subpart B of this part. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Section 430.23 is amended by 

revising paragraph (w) to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.23 Test procedures for the 

measurement of energy and water 

consumption. 

* * * * * 

(w) Ceiling fans. The efficiency of a 

ceiling fan, expressed in cubic feet per 

minute per watt (CFM/watt), shall be 

measured in accordance with sections 

2.3, 2.5, 2.6 and 3 of appendix U to 

subpart B of this part. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Appendix U to subpart B of part 

430 is revised to read as follows: 

Appendix U To Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Ceiling Fans 

After [DATE 30 DAYS AFTER 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN 

THE Federal Register] and prior to [DATE 

180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], 

manufacturers must make any 

representations with respect to the energy 

use or efficiency of ceiling fans, except 

hugger ceiling fans, multi-mount ceiling fans 

in the hugger configuration, and high-volume 

ceiling fans, as defined in 10 CFR 430.2 in 

accordance with the results of testing 

pursuant to this Appendix U or the 

procedures in Appendix U as it appeared at 

10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix U, in 

the 10 CFR parts 200 to 499 edition revised 

as of January 1, 2014. After [DATE 180 DAYS 

AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE], manufacturers of ceiling fans 

must make any representations with respect 

to energy use or efficiency in accordance 

with the results of testing pursuant to this 

appendix. 

1. Definitions: 

1.1. Airflow means the rate of air 

movement at a specific fan-speed setting 

expressed in cubic feet per minute (CFM). 

1.2. Ceiling fan efficiency means the ratio 

of the total airflow to the total power 

consumption, in units of cubic feet per 

minute per watt (CFM/W). 

1.3. High speed means the highest 

available ceiling fan speed. 

1.4. Low speed means the lowest available 

ceiling fan speed. 

1.5. Multi-head ceiling fan means a ceiling 

fan with more than one fan head, i.e., more 

than one set of rotating fan blades. 

1.6. Total airflow means the following: For 

low-volume ceiling fans, total airflow means 

the sum of the product of airflow and hours 

of operation at high and low speeds. For 

high-volume ceiling fans, total airflow is the 

product of airflow at high speed and the 

hours of operation in active mode. 

2. General Instructions, Test Apparatus, 

and Test Measurement: General instructions 

apply to characterizing the energy 

performance of both low-volume and highvolume ceiling fans. The test apparatus and 

test measurement used to characterize energy 

performance depend on whether the ceiling 

fan is low volume or high volume. 

2.1. General instructions: Record 

measurements at the resolution of the test 

instrumentation. Round off calculations to 

the same number of significant digits as the 

previous step. Round the final ceiling fan 

efficiency value to the nearest whole number 

as follows: 

2.1.1. A fractional number at or above the 

midpoint between the two consecutive whole 

numbers shall be rounded up to the higher 

of the two whole numbers; or 

2.1.2. A fractional number below the 

midpoint between the two consecutive whole 

numbers shall be rounded down to the lower 

of the two whole numbers. 

For multi-head ceiling fans, the effective 

blade span is the blade span of an individual 

fan head, if all fan heads are the same size. 

If the fan heads are of varying sizes, the 

effective blade span is the blade span of the 

largest fan head. 

2.2. Test apparatus for low-volume ceiling 

fans: All instruments are to have tolerances 

within ±1% of reading, except for the air 

velocity sensors, which should have 

tolerances within ±5% of reading. Equipment 

is to be calibrated at least once a year to 

compensate for variation over time. 

2.2.1. Air Delivery Room Requirements: 

The air delivery room dimensions are to be 

20 ±0.75 ft. × 20 ±0.75 ft. with an 11 ±0.75 

ft. high ceiling. The control room shall be 

constructed external to the air delivery room. 

The ceiling shall be constructed of sheet 

rock or stainless plate. The walls shall be of 

adequate thickness to maintain the specified 

temperature and humidity during the test. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2

62544 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

The paint used on the walls, as well as the 

wall material, must be of a type that 

minimizes absorption of humidity and that 

keeps the temperature of the room constant 

during the test (e.g., oil-based paint). 

The room shall have no ventilation other 

than an air conditioning and return system 

used to control the temperature and humidity 

of the room. The construction of the room 

must ensure consistent air circulation 

patterns within the room. Vents must have 

electronically-operated damper doors 

controllable from a switch outside of the 

testing room. 

2.2.2. Equipment Set-Up: Hang the ceiling 

fan to be tested directly from a false ceiling, 

according to the manufacturer’s installation 

instructions. All standard and hugger ceiling 

fans shall be hung in the fan configuration 

that minimizes the distance between the false 

ceiling and the fan blades. Multi-mount fans 

shall be hung and tested in two 

configurations: in the configuration that 

meets the definition of a standard ceiling fan, 

while minimizing the distance the ceiling 

and the lowest part of the fan blades; and in 

the configuration that meets the definition of 

a hugger ceiling fan, while minimizing the 

distance between the ceiling and the lowest 

part of the fan blades. The length and breadth 

of the false ceiling must be at least 8 inches 

larger than the blade span of the ceiling fan. 

If a false ceiling is at least 8 inches larger 

than the blade span of the largest low-volume 

ceiling fan that will be tested by a testing 

facility, the same false ceiling may be used 

for all fans. The thickness of the false ceiling 

must be sufficient to maintain a flat bottom 

surface or be supported by additional 

structural fixtures or stiffeners on the top 

surface to maintain that shape. The false 

ceiling may be made of more than one piece, 

provided that the pieces are joined together 

such that the bottom surface is smooth. The 

false ceiling is to be constructed of heavyduty plywood or drywall, or a material with 

similar surface roughness. The false ceiling 

must be level when the ceiling fan is 

suspended from it. 

Hang the false ceiling from an actuator 

hanging system, which supports the weight 

of both the false ceiling and the ceiling fan 

and controls the height of the false ceiling 

such that the distance between the fan blades 

and the air velocity sensors can be adjusted 

through automatic (motor-driven) action. 

Either a rotating sensor arm or four fixed 

sensor arms can be used to take airflow 

measurements along four axes, labeled A–D. 

Axes A, B, C, and D are at 0, 90, 180, and 

270 degree positions. Axes A–D can be 

designated either by using the four walls or 

four corners of the room. See Figure 1 of this 

appendix. 

The amount of exposed wiring must be 

minimized. All sensor lead wires must be 

stored under the floor, if possible. 

The sensors shall be placed at exactly 4- 

inch intervals along a sensor arm, starting 

with the first sensor at the point where the 

four axes intersect. Do not touch the actual 

sensor prior to testing. Enough sensors shall 

be used to record air delivery within a circle 

8 inches larger in diameter than the blade 

span of the ceiling fan being tested. A proper 

experimental set-up is shown in Figure 2 of 

this appendix. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62545 

Table 1 of this appendix shows the 

appropriate number of sensors needed per 

each of four axes (including the first sensor 

at the intersection of the axes) for each fan 

size. 

TABLE 1 TO APPENDIX U TO SUBPART

B OF PART 430: SENSOR SELECTION GUIDE

Fan blade span * 

(inches) 

Number 

of sensors 

36 .............................................. 6 

42 .............................................. 7 

44 .............................................. 7 

48 .............................................. 7 

52 .............................................. 8 

54 .............................................. 8 

56 .............................................. 8 

60 .............................................. 9 

72 .............................................. 10 

* The fan sizes listed are intended simply to 

be illustrative and do not restrict which ceiling 

fan sizes can be tested. 

An RPM (revolutions per minute) meter, or 

tachometer, should be installed hanging from 

the ceiling and passing through the false 

ceiling so that the RPM of the ceiling fan 

blades can be measured during testing. 

Use an RMS sensor capable of measuring 

power with an accuracy of ±1% to measure 

ceiling fan power consumption. Prior to 

testing, the test laboratory must verify the 

performance of the sensor and sensor 

software to be used during the test. 

2.2.3. Multi-Head Ceiling Fan Test Set-Up: 

Multi-headed ceiling fans are to be hung from 

the false ceiling such that one of the ceiling 

fan heads is directly over sensor 1 (i.e., at the 

intersection of axes A, B, C, and D). This can 

be achieved by either offsetting the entire 

false ceiling, or the multi-head fan with 

respect to the false ceiling, as long as the 

requirement that the false ceiling extend at 

least 8 inches beyond the blade span of the 

centered fan head is maintained. Supporting 

chains, wires, or ropes may be used to keep 

the false ceiling level if the multi-head 

ceiling fan is offset with respect to the false 

ceiling. The distance between the lowest 

point on the fan blades of the centered fan 

head and the air velocity sensors is to be 

such that it is the same as for all other lowvolume ceiling fans (see Figure 2 of this 

appendix). Switching on only the centered 

fan head, the airflow measurements are to be 

made in the same manner as for all other 

low-volume ceiling fans. The power 

consumption measurements are to be made 

separately, with all fan heads on. 

2.2.4. Test Set-Up for Ceiling Fans With 

Airflow Not Directly Downward: For ceiling 

fans where the airflow is not directly 

downward, the ceiling fan head is to be 

adjusted such that the airflow is as vertical 

as possible prior to testing. The distance 

between the lowest point on the blades and 

the air velocity sensors should be the same 

as for all other low-volume ceiling fans. For 

ceiling fans where a fully vertical orientation 

of airflow cannot be achieved, the ceiling fan 

is to be oriented such that any remaining tilt 

is aligned along one of the four sensor axes. 

Instead of measuring the air velocity for only 

those sensors directly beneath the ceiling fan, 

the air velocity is to be measured at all 

sensors along that axis, as well as the axis 

oriented 180 degrees with respect to that 

axis. For example, if the tilt is oriented along 

axis A, air velocity measurements are to be 

taken for all sensors along the A–C axis. No 

measurements would need to be taken along 

the B–D axis in this case. 

2.3. Active mode test measurement for lowvolume ceiling fans. 

2.3.1. Test conditions to be followed when 

testing: 

• The temperature and humidity setting 

shall be 76 degrees ±2 degrees Fahrenheit 

and 50% ±5% relative humidity. These shall 

be held constant during the entire test 

process. 

• Allow the sensors to be turned on and 

the fan to run for 15 minutes at each fan 

speed/setting before taking readings. 

• If present, the ceiling fan light fixture is 

to be installed but turned off during testing. 

• If present, any heater is to be installed 

but turned off during testing. 

• The tests shall be conducted with the fan 

connected to a supply circuit with a voltage 

of (a) 120 V for fans rated on the nameplate 

from 105 to 125 V; and (b) 240 V for fans 

rated on the nameplate from 208 to 250 V. 

The test voltage shall not vary by more than 

±1% during the tests. 

• The test shall be conducted with the fan 

connected to a supply circuit at the rated 

frequency. 

• Air conditioning vents shall be closed 

during testing. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.012</GPH>
62546 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

2.3.2. Airflow and Power Consumption 

Testing Procedure: Measure the airflow 

(CFM) and power consumption (watt) for 

low-volume ceiling fans at high and low 

speed. 

Step 1: Make sure the transformer power is 

off. Hang fan at the actuator hanging system, 

and connect wires as directed by 

manufacturer’s wiring instructions. Note: 

Assemble fan prior to the test; lab personnel 

must follow the instructions provided by the 

fan manufacturer. The fan blade assembly 

shall be balanced in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s instructions to avoid 

excessive vibration of the motor assembly (at 

any speed) during operation. 

Step 2: Adjust the actuator such that the 

lowest point on the fan blades is 43 inches 

above the height of the sensor heads. If 

necessary, use the hoist’s toggle switch and 

adjust height. 

Step 3: Set the first sensor arm (if using 

four fixed arms) or single sensor arm (if using 

a single rotating arm) to the 0 degree Position 

(Axis A). If necessary, use marking as 

reference. If using a single rotating arm, 

adjust the sensor arm alignment until it is at 

the 0 degree position by remotely controlling 

the antenna rotator. 

Step 4: Set software up to read and record 

air velocity, expressed in feet per minute 

(FPM) in 1 second intervals. (Temperature 

does not need to be recorded in 1 second 

intervals.) Record current barometric 

pressure. 

Step 5: Allow test fan to run 15 minutes 

at rated voltage and at blade speed to be 

tested. Turn off all environmental 

conditioning equipment entering the 

chamber (e.g., air conditioning), close all 

doors and vents, and wait an additional 3 

minutes prior to starting test session. 

Step 6: Begin recording readings. Take 100 

readings (100 seconds run-time) and save 

these data. 

Step 7: Similarly, take 100 readings (100 

seconds run-time) for Axes B, C, and D; save 

these data as well. If using four fixed sensor 

arms, the readings for all sensor arms should 

be taken simultaneously. 

Step 8: Repeat steps 3 through 7 above for 

the remaining fan speed. Note: Ensure that 

temperature and humidity readings are held 

within the required tolerances for the 

duration of the test (all tested speeds). It may 

be helpful to turn on environmental 

conditioning equipment between test 

sessions to ready the room for the following 

speed test. 

Step 9: If testing a multi-mount ceiling fan, 

repeat steps 1 through 8 with the ceiling fan 

hung in the configuration (either hugger or 

standard) not already tested. 

If a multi-head ceiling fan includes more 

than one type of ceiling fan head, then test 

at least one of each unique type. A fan head 

with different construction that could affect 

air movement or power consumption, such as 

housing, blade pitch, or motor, would 

constitute a different type of fan head. 

Measure power input at a point that 

includes all power-consuming components of 

the ceiling fan (but without any attached 

light kit or heater energized). Measure power 

continuously at the rated voltage that 

represents normal operation over the time 

period for which the airflow test is 

conducted for each speed, and record the 

average value of the power measurement at 

that speed in watts (W). 

Measure ceiling fan power consumption 

simultaneously with the airflow test, except 

for multi-head ceiling fans. For multi-head 

ceiling fans, measure power consumption at 

each speed continuously for 100 seconds 

with all fan heads turned on, and record the 

average value at each speed in watts (W). 

2.4. Test apparatus for high-volume ceiling 

fans: The test apparatus and instructions for 

testing high-volume ceiling fans shall 

conform to the requirements specified in 

Section 3 (‘‘Units of Measurement’’), Section 

4 (‘‘Symbols and Subscripts’’), Section 5 

(‘‘Definitions’’), Section 6 (‘‘Instruments and 

Methods of Measurement’’), and Section 7 

(‘‘Equipment and Setups’’) of the Air 

Movement and Control Association (AMCA) 

International’s ‘‘AMCA 230: Laboratory 

Methods of Testing Air Circulating Fans for 

Rating and Certification,’’ February 22, 2012 

(incorporated by reference, see § 430.3), with 

the following modifications: 

2.4.1. The test procedure is applicable to 

high-volume ceiling fans up to 24 feet in 

diameter. 

2.4.2. A ‘‘ceiling fan’’ is defined as in 10 

CFR 430.2. 

2.4.3. For all ceiling fans, the minimum 

distance between the ceiling and the blades 

of a ceiling fan being tested is 44 inches. 

2.4.4. For a ceiling fan larger than 6 feet in 

diameter, the clearance between the floor and 

the blades of a ceiling fan being tested is 20 

feet. 

2.4.5. For a ceiling fan larger than 6 feet in 

diameter, the minimum distance between the 

centerline of a ceiling fan being tested and 

the walls and large obstructions all around is 

half the ceiling fan blade span plus 10 feet. 

2.5. Active mode test measurement for 

high-volume ceiling fans: Calculate the 

airflow (CFM) and measure the power 

consumption (watt) for ceiling fans at high 

speed, in accordance with the test 

requirements specified in Section 8 

(‘‘Observations and Conduct of Test’’) and 

Section 9 (‘‘Calculations’’) of AMCA 230 

(incorporated by reference, see § 430.3), with 

the following modifications: 

2.5.1. Measure power consumption at a 

point that includes all power-consuming 

components of the ceiling fan (but without 

any attached light kit or heater energized). 

2.5.2. Measure power consumption 

continuously at the rated voltage that 

represents normal operation over the time 

period for which the load differential test is 

conducted. 

2.6. Test measurement for standby power 

consumption: Standby power consumption 

must be measured for both low and highvolume ceiling fans that offer one or more of 

the following user-oriented or protective 

functions: 

• The ability to facilitate the activation or 

deactivation of other functions (including 

active mode) by remote switch (including 

remote control), internal sensor, or timer. 

• Continuous functions, including 

information or status displays (including 

clocks), or sensor-based functions. 

Standby power consumption must be 

measured after completion of the airflow test 

for low-volume ceiling fans, or the load 

differential test for high-volume ceiling fans, 

and after the active mode functionality has 

been switched off (i.e., the rotation of the 

ceiling fan blades is no longer energized). 

The ceiling fan must remain connected to the 

main power supply and be in the same 

configuration as in active mode (i.e., any 

ceiling fan light fixture should still be 

attached). Measure standby power 

consumption according to IEC 62301 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3) with 

the following modifications: 

2.6.1. Allow 3 minutes between switching 

off active mode functionality and beginning 

the standby power test. (No additional time 

before measurement is required.) 

2.6.2. Measure power consumption 

continuously for 100 seconds, and record the 

average value of the standby power 

measurement in watts (W). 

3. Calculation of Ceiling Fan Efficiency 

From the Test Results: The efficacy of a 

ceiling fan is the ceiling fan efficiency (as 

defined in section 1 of this appendix). 

Using the airflow and power consumption 

measurements from section 2, calculate 

ceiling fan efficiency for a low-volume 

ceiling fan as follows: 

Where: 

CFMi = airflow at a given speed, 

OHi = operating hours at a given speed, 

Wi = power consumption at a given speed, 

H = high speed, 

L = low speed, 

OHSb = operating hours in standby mode, and 

WSb = power consumption in standby mode. 

Using the airflow and power consumption 

measurements from section 3, calculate 

ceiling fan efficiency for a high-volume 

ceiling fan as follows: 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.013</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 62547 

Where: 

CFMH = airflow at high speed, 

OHA = operating hours in active mode, 

WH = power consumption at high speed, 

OHSb = operating hours in standby mode, and 

WSb = power consumption in standby mode. 

Table 2 of this appendix specifies the daily 

hours of operation to be used in calculating 

ceiling fan efficiency: 

TABLE 2 TO APPENDIX U TO SUBPART B OF PART 430: DAILY OPERATING HOURS FOR CALCULATING CEILING FAN

EFFICIENCY

Daily Operating Hours for Low-Volume Ceiling Fans 

No standby With standby 

High Speed .............................................................................................................................................................. 4.2 4.2 

Low Speed ............................................................................................................................................................... 2.2 2.2 

Standby Mode .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.0 17.6 

Off Mode .................................................................................................................................................................. 17.6 0.0 

Daily Operating Hours for High-Volume Ceiling Fans 

No 

standby 

With 

standby 

Active Mode ............................................................................................................................................................. 12.0 12.0 

Standby Mode .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.0 12.0 

Off Mode .................................................................................................................................................................. 12.0 0.0 

The effective area corresponding to each 

sensor is to be calculated with the following 

equations: 

For sensor 1, the sensor located directly 

underneath the center of the ceiling fan, the 

effective width of the circle is 2 inches, and 

the effective area is: 

For the sensors between sensor 1 and the 

last sensor used in the measurement, the 

effective area has a width of 4 inches. If a 

sensor is a distance d, in inches, from sensor 

1, then the effective area is: 

For the last sensor, the width of the 

effective area depends on the horizontal 

displacement between the last sensor and the 

point on the ceiling fan blades furthest 

radially from the center of the fan. The total 

area included in an airflow calculation is the 

area of a circle 8 inches larger in diameter 

than the ceiling fan blade span. 

Therefore, for example, for a 42-inch 

ceiling fan, the last sensor is 3 inches beyond 

the end of the ceiling fan blades. Because 

only the area within 4 inches of the end of 

the ceiling fan blades is included in the 

airflow calculation, the effective width of the 

circle corresponding to the last sensor would 

be 3 inches. The calculation for the effective 

area corresponding to the last sensor would 

then be: 

For a 46-inch ceiling fan, the effective area 

of the last sensor would have a width of 5 

inches, and the effective area would be: 

3.1.1. Ceiling fan efficiency calculations for 

multi-head ceiling fans: To determine the 

airflow at a given speed for a multi-head 

ceiling fan, measure the airflow for each fan 

head. Repeat for each fan head. Testing of 

each fan head is not required if the fan heads 

are essentially identical (i.e., do not have 

differences in construction such as housing, 

blade pitch, or motor could affect air 

movement or power consumption); instead, 

the measurements for one fan head can be 

used for each essentially identical fan head. 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.014</GPH> EP17OC14.015</GPH> EP17OC14.016</GPH> EP17OC14.017</GPH> EP17OC14.018</GPH>
62548 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Sum the measured airflow for each fan head 

included in the ceiling fan. The power 

consumption is the measured power 

consumption with all fan heads on. 

Using the airflow and power consumption 

measurements from section 2 of this 

appendix, calculate ceiling fan efficiency for 

a low-volume, multi-head ceiling fan as 

follows: 

Where: 

CFMi = sum of airflow at a given speed for 

each head, 

OHi = operating hours at a given speed, 

Wi = total power consumption at a given 

speed, 

H = high speed, 

L = low speed, 

OHSb = operating hours in standby mode, and 

WSb = power consumption in standby mode. 

3.1.2. Ceiling fan efficiency calculations for 

ceiling fans with airflow not directly 

downward: Using a set of sensors that cover 

the same diameter as if the airflow was 

directly downward, the airflow at each speed 

should be calculated based on the continuous 

set of sensors with the largest air velocity 

measurements. This continuous set of 

sensors should be along the axis that the 

ceiling fan tilt is directed in (and along the 

axis that is 180 degrees from the first axis). 

For example, a 42-inch fan tilted toward axis 

A may create the pattern of air velocity 

shown in Figure 3 of this appendix. As 

shown in Table 1 of this appendix, a 42-inch 

fan would normally require 7 active sensors. 

However because the fan is not directed 

downward, all sensors must record data. In 

this case, because the set of sensors 

corresponding to maximum air velocity are 

centered 3 sensor positions away from the 

sensor 1 along the A axis, substitute the air 

velocity at A axis sensor 4 for the average air 

velocity at sensor 1. Take the average of the 

air velocity at A axis sensors 3 and 5 as a 

substitute for the average air velocity at 

sensor 2, take the average of the air velocity 

at A axis sensors 2 and 6 as a substitute for 

the average air velocity at sensor 3, etc. 

Lastly, take the average of the air velocities 

at A axis sensor 10 and C axis sensor 4 as 

a substitute for the average air velocity at 

sensor 7. Any air velocity measurements 

made along the B–D axis are not included in 

the calculation of average air velocity. 

[FR Doc. 2014–22883 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP17OC14.019</GPH> EP17OC14.020</GPH>