Vol. 78 Wednesday, 

No. 1 January 2, 2013 

Part II 

Department of Energy 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Residential Clothes 

Dryers; Proposed Rule 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
152 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–TP–0054] 

RIN 1904–AC63 

Energy Conservation Program: Test 

Procedures for Residential Clothes 

Dryers 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) proposes to revise its test 

procedures for residential clothes dryers 

established under the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act. The proposed 

amendments to appendix D1 would 

include testing methods for more 

accurately measuring the effects of 

automatic cycle termination. In 

addition, the proposed amendments 

would update the reference to the latest 

edition of the International 

Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 

Standard 62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power,’’ Edition 2.0 2011–01. For the 

test procedures at both appendix D and 

appendix D1, DOE proposes to clarify 

the cycle settings used for the test cycle 

and the requirements for the gas supply 

for gas clothes dryers. 

DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting 

on Wednesday, February 6, 2013 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. 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NOPR) before and 

after the public meeting, but no later 

than March 18, 2013. See section V, 

‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. 

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be 

held at the U.S. Department of Energy, 

Forrestal Building, Room 1E–245 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. To attend, 

please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at 

(202) 586–2945. For more information, 

refer to the Public Participation, section 

V, near the end of this notice. 

Any comments submitted must 

identify the NOPR on Test Procedures 

for Residential Clothes Dryers, and 

provide docket number EERE–2011– 

BT–TP–0054 and/or regulatory 

information number (RIN) 1904–AC63. 

Comments may be submitted using any 

of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: RCDAT-2011-TP0054@ee.doe.gov. Include docket 

number EERE–2011–BT–TP–0054 and/ 

or RIN 1904–AC63 in the subject line of 

the message. 

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

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on a 

compact disc (CD), in which case it is 

not necessary to include printed copies. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 6th 

Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., 

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. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see section V of this document (Public 

Participation). 

Docket: The docket is available for 

review at www.regulations.gov, 

including Federal Register notices, 

framework documents, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials. All documents in 

the docket are listed in the 

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://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;dct=

FR%252BPR%252BN%252

BO%252BSR;rpp=10;po=0;D=EERE2011-BT-TP-0054. This web page will 

contain a link to the docket for this 

notice on the www.regulations.gov site. 

The www.regulations.gov web page 

contains instructions on how to access 

all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See section V 

for information on how to submit 

comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment or review other 

public comments and the docket, or 

participate in the public meeting, 

contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 

586–2945 or email: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Stephen Witkowski, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. Tel.: (202) 

586–7463. Email: 

Stephen.Witkowski@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC, 20585–0121. Tel.: 

(202) 586–7796, Email: 

Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Authority and Background 

A. General Test Procedure Rulemaking 

Process 

B. DOE Clothes Dryer Test Procedure 

1. January 2011 TP Final Rule 

2. August 2011 RFI 

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

III. Discussion 

A. Products Covered by This Test 

Procedure Rulemaking 

B. Automatic Cycle Termination 

1. August 2011 RFI 

2. Product Testing 

3. Energy Consumption versus RMC 

4. Water Supply Testing 

5. Proposed Amendments 

C. Incorporating by Reference IEC Standard 

62301 Second Edition for Measuring 

Standby Mode and Off Mode Power 

1. Stable Power Consumption 

2. Unstable, Non-Cyclic Power 

Consumption 

3. Cyclic Power Consumption 

4. Conclusions on Test Methodology 

D. Technical Correction to the Calculation 

of the Per-Cycle Combined Total Energy 

Consumption 

E. Clarifications to Test Conditions 

F. Effects of Proposed Test Procedure 

Revisions on Compliance With 

Standards 

1. Active Mode 

2. Standby Mode and Off Mode 

G. Compliance With Other EPCA 

Requirements 

1. Test Burden 

2. Certification Requirements 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under the 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 153 

1 ‘‘Bone dry’’ is defined in the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure as a condition of a load of test 

clothes which has been dried in a dryer at 

maximum temperature for a minimum of 10 

minutes, removed and weighed before cool down, 

and then dried again for 10-minute periods until the 

final weight change of the load is 1 percent or less. 

(10 CFR subpart B, appendix D, section 1.2) 

A. Attendance at Public Meeting 

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared 

General Statements for Distribution 

C. Conduct of Public Meeting 

D. Submission of Comments 

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

1. Test Load 

2. Automatic Cycle Termination Test Cycle 

3. Timed Dry Test Cycle 

4. Characteristics of Water for Wetting Test 

Load 

5. Incorporation by Reference of IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) 

6. Technical Correction to the Calculation 

of the Per-cycle Combined Total Energy 

Consumption 

7. Clarifications to Test Conditions 

8. Effects of Proposed Amendments for 

Automatic Cycle Termination on Energy 

Conservation Standards 

9. Test Burden 

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Authority and Background 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291, et 

seq.; ‘‘EPCA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’) sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency. (All 

references to EPCA refer to the statute 

as amended through the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA 2007), Public Law 110–140 (Dec. 

19, 2007)). Part B of title III, which for 

editorial reasons was re-designated as 

Part A upon codification in the U.S. 

Code (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309), establishes 

the ‘‘Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products Other Than 

Automobiles.’’ Covered consumer 

products include clothes dryers, the 

subject of today’s notice. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(8)) 

Under EPCA, this 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 (1) as the basis for certifying 

to DOE that their products comply with 

the applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted under EPCA, and (2) 

for making representations about the 

efficiency of those products. Similarly, 

DOE must use these test requirements to 

determine whether the products comply 

with any relevant standards 

promulgated under EPCA. 

A. General Test Procedure Rulemaking 

Process 

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

the criteria and procedures DOE must 

follow when prescribing or amending 

test procedures for covered products. 

EPCA provides in relevant part that any 

test procedures prescribed or amended 

under this section must be reasonably 

designed to produce test results that 

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 

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)) In any rulemaking to amend 

a test procedure, DOE must also 

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)) 

EPCA also requires DOE to amend the 

test procedures for all residential 

covered products to include measures of 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption. Specifically, EPCA 

provides definitions of ‘‘standby mode’’ 

and ‘‘off mode’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(1)(A)) and permits DOE to 

amend these definitions in the context 

of a given product (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(1)(B)). The statute requires 

integration of such energy consumption 

into the overall energy efficiency, 

energy consumption, or other energy 

descriptor for each covered product, 

unless DOE determines that— 

(i) The current test procedures for a 

covered product already fully account 

for and incorporate the standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption of the 

covered product; or 

(ii) Such an integrated test procedure 

is technically infeasible for a particular 

covered product, in which case the 

Secretary shall prescribe a separate 

standby mode and off mode energy use 

test procedure for the covered product, 

if technically feasible. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(A)) 

In any test procedure amendment, 

DOE must consider the most current 

versions of IEC Standard 62301, 

‘‘Household electrical appliances— 

Measurement of standby power,’’ and 

IEC Standard 62087, ‘‘Methods of 

measurement for the power 

consumption of audio, video, and 

related equipment.’’ Id. 

B. DOE Clothes Dryer Test Procedure 

DOE’s test procedures for clothes 

dryers are codified in appendix D and 

appendix D1 to subpart B of Title 10 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

DOE established its test procedure for 

clothes dryers at appendix D in a final 

rule published in the Federal Register 

on September 14, 1977 (the September 

1977 TP Final Rule). 42 FR 46145. On 

May 19, 1981, DOE published a final 

rule (the May 1981 TP Final Rule) to 

amend the test procedure by 

establishing a field-use factor for clothes 

dryers with automatic termination 

controls, clarifying the test cloth 

specifications and clothes dryer 

preconditioning, and making editorial 

and minor technical changes. 46 FR 

27324. The test procedure includes 

provisions for determining the energy 

factor (EF) for clothes dryers, which is 

a measure of the total energy required to 

dry a standard test load of laundry to a 

‘‘bone dry’’ 1 state. 

1. January 2011 TP Final Rule 

On January 6, 2011, the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) published 

in the Federal Register a final rule for 

the residential clothes dryer and room 

air conditioner test procedure 

rulemaking (76 FR 972) (January 2011 

TP Final Rule), in which it (1) adopted 

the provisions for the measurement of 

standby mode and off mode power use 

for those products; and (2) adopted 

several amendments to the clothes dryer 

and room air conditioner test 

procedures concerning the active mode 

for these products. 76 FR 972 (Jan. 6, 

2011). DOE created a new appendix D1 

in 10 CFR part 430 subpart B that 

contained the amended test procedure 

for clothes dryers. Manufacturers must 

use the test procedures in appendix D1 

to demonstrate compliance with the 

amended energy conservation standards 

for clothes dryers as of January 1, 2015 

(76 FR 52852 (Aug. 24, 2011), 76 FR 

52854 (Aug. 24, 2011)) 

For clothes dryer standby mode and 

off mode, the January 2011 TP Final 

Rule amended the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure to incorporate by 

reference specific clauses from the 

International Electrotechnical 

Commission (IEC) Standard 62301, 

‘‘Household electrical appliances– 

Measurement of standby power,’’ (first 

edition June 2005) regarding test 

conditions and test procedures for 

measuring standby mode and off mode 

power consumption, as well as language 

to clarify application of these provisions 

for measuring standby mode and off 

mode power consumption in clothes 

dryers. In addition, DOE adopted 

definitions of modes based on the 

relevant provisions from IEC Standard 

62301 Second Edition Committee Draft 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
154 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

2The CEF is defined as the clothes dryer test load 

weight in pounds divided by the sum of the percycle standby and off mode energy consumption 

and either the total per-cycle electric dryer energy 

consumption or the total per-cycle gas dryer energy 

consumption expressed in kilowatt hours (kWh). 

3RMC is the ratio of the weight of water 

contained by the test load to the bone-dry weight 

of the test load, expressed as a percent. 

4The test method proposed in the June 2010 TP 

SNOPR involved testing clothes dryers with 

automatic termination controls using the ‘‘normal’’ 

setting (and where the temperature setting can be 

chosen independently of the program, it shall be set 

to the highest level) and a test load with a starting 

moisture content of 57.5 ± 0.33 percent, allowing 

the dryer to run until the heater switches off for the 

final time at the end of the drying cycle to achieve 

a final remaining moisture content of no more than 

5 percent. 5The DOE test load is composed of cotton momie 

test cloths that are each 24 inches by 36 inches in 

dimensions and are a blend of 50-percent cotton 

and 50-percent polyester. 

6Most clothes dryers available on the market 

provide separate settings for the ‘‘temperature 

level’’ and ‘‘dryness level.’’ The temperature level 

refers to the temperature of the hot air used to dry 

the load in the drum. The dryness level refers to 

the desired remaining moisture content of the load 

at the completion of the drying cycle. 

for Vote (IEC Standard 62301 CDV). 

DOE established the Combined Energy 

Factor (CEF) for clothes dryers to 

integrate energy use in the standby 

mode and off mode with the energy use 

of the main functions of the product.2

76 FR 972, 975–6 (Jan. 6, 2011). 

For clothes dryer active mode, DOE 

adopted amendments in the January 

2011 TP Final Rule to include 

provisions for the testing of ventless 

clothes dryers. 76 FR 972, 976–7 (Jan. 6, 

2011). The amendments also included 

the following changes to reflect the 

current usage and capabilities of 

products: (1) Changing the annual 

clothes dryer use cycles from 416 to 283 

cycles per year, (2) changing the initial 

remaining moisture content (RMC) 3 of 

clothes dryer loads from 70 percent ± 

3.5 percent to 57.5 percent ± 3.5 

percent, and (3) changing the clothes 

dryer test load size from 7.00 pounds 

(lbs) ± .07 lbs to 8.45 ± .085 lbs for 

standard-size clothes dryers. 76 FR 972, 

977 (Jan. 6, 2011). The January 2011 TP 

Final Rule also amended the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure by updating 

test cloth preconditioning provisions; 

revising the water temperature for test 

load preparation from 100 degrees 

Fahrenheit (°F) ± 5 °F to 60 °F ± 5 °F; 

updating the reference to the relevant 

industry test standard (Association of 

Home Appliance Manufacturers 

(AHAM) Standard HLD–1–2009); 

eliminating reference to an obsolete 

industry test standard (AHAM Standard 

HLD–2EC); clarifying the required gas 

supply conditions for testing gas clothes 

dryers; clarifying the provisions for 

measuring the drum capacity; clarifying 

the definition of ‘‘automatic termination 

control’’ for clothes dryers; and adding 

the calculations of EF and CEF to 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1. 

76 FR 972, 978 (Jan. 6, 2011). 

In the January 2011 TP Final Rule, 

DOE did not adopt the amendments to 

more accurately measure automatic 

cycle termination that were originally 

proposed in the test procedure 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (SNOPR) (June 2010 TP 

SNOPR) (75 FR 37594, 37612–20 (June 

29, 2010)).4 As further discussed in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule, DOE 

conducted testing of representative 

residential clothes dryers using the 

automatic cycle termination test 

procedure proposed in the June 2010 TP 

SNOPR. The results of the testing 

revealed that all of the clothes dryers 

tested significantly over-dried the DOE 

test load 5 to near bone dry and, as a 

result, the measured EF values were 

significantly lower than EF values 

obtained using the existing DOE test 

procedure. The test data also indicated 

that clothes dryers equipped with 

automatic termination controls would 

be considered less efficient than timer 

dryers. 76 FR 972, 977 (Jan. 6, 2011). 

In the January 2011 TP Final Rule, 

DOE concluded that the test procedure 

amendments for automatic cycle 

termination proposed in the June 2010 

TP SNOPR do not adequately measure 

the energy consumption of clothes 

dryers equipped with such systems 

using the test load specified in the DOE 

test procedure. DOE stated that clothes 

dryers with automatic termination 

sensing control systems, which infer the 

RMC of the load from the properties of 

the exhaust air such as temperature and 

humidity, may be designed to stop the 

cycle when a load of varying weights, 

composition, and size has a higher RMC 

than the RMC obtained using the 

proposed automatic cycle termination 

test procedure in conjunction with the 

existing DOE test load. In considering 

whether other test loads would be 

appropriate to incorporate into the DOE 

test procedure to produce both 

representative and repeatable test 

results, however, DOE noted that 

manufacturers indicated that test load 

types and test cloth materials different 

than those specified in the DOE test 

procedure do not produce results as 

repeatable as those obtained using the 

test load as currently specified. 76 FR 

977 (Jan. 6, 2011). 

2. August 2011 RFI 

On August 12, 2011, DOE published 

a Request for Information (RFI) to 

further investigate the effects of 

automatic cycle termination on the 

energy efficiency (August 2011 RFI). 76 

FR 50145. DOE sought information, 

data, and comments regarding methods 

for more accurately measuring the 

effects of automatic cycle termination in 

the clothes dryer test procedure. In 

particular, DOE sought comment on the 

following: (1) The characteristics of 

loads of varying weights, composition, 

and size, (2) the accuracy of different 

automatic cycle termination sensors and 

controls, (3) the target final RMC used 

by manufacturers to maintain consumer 

satisfaction, (4) the effects of the 

characteristics of water (i.e., hardness 

and conductivity) used for wetting the 

test load prior to testing, and (5) the 

cycle settings selected by consumers for 

automatic termination cycles. In 

response to the August 2011 RFI, 

interested parties commented that DOE 

should amend the clothes dryer test 

procedure to include provisions to 

account for the effectiveness of 

automatic cycle termination and amend 

the relevant energy conservation 

standards based on the effects of the test 

procedure changes according to EPCA. 

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking 

Automatic Termination Control 

Procedures 

In this notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NOPR), DOE proposes to modify the 

test procedures for clothes dryers in 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1 

to include methods for more accurately 

measuring the effects of automatic cycle 

termination. The proposed method 

would require that clothes dryers with 

automatic cycle termination controls be 

tested using the ‘‘Normal’’ automatic 

termination cycle setting. Where the 

drying temperature setting can be 

chosen independently, it shall be set to 

the maximum. Where the dryness level 

setting can be chosen independently, it 

shall be set to the ‘‘normal’’ or 

‘‘medium’’ dryness level setting.6 The 

proposed amendments would then 

specify that the clothes dryer be allowed 

to run until the completion of the drying 

cycle, including the cool down period, 

to achieve a final RMC of no more than 

2 percent. If the final measured RMC is 

above 2 percent, the test would be 

considered invalid and the proposed 

amendments would require that a new 

test cycle be run using the highest 

dryness level setting. DOE notes that a 

final RMC of 2 percent using the DOE 

test load would be more representative 

of clothes dryers currently on the 

market and representative of the 

maximum consumer-accepted final 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 155 

RMC. Finally, DOE is proposing to 

apply a field use factor of 0.80 for 

clothes dryers with automatic cycle 

termination to account for the measured 

energy consumption at the end of the 

automatic termination cycle drying the 

DOE test load below 2-percent RMC. 

For clothes dryers with only timed 

dry control settings, the proposed 

amendments would require that the 

existing timed dry test cycle in 

appendix D1 be used, but change the 

final RMC from 2.5–5 percent to 1–2.5 

percent. DOE also proposes to change 

the normalization in the calculation of 

the per-cycle energy consumption to 

represent the energy consumption 

required to dry the test load to 2-percent 

RMC. Both of these changes are 

proposed to be consistent with the test 

method for automatic cycle termination 

and to be representative of the final 

RMC of clothes dryers currently on the 

market using the DOE test load. 

Incorporation of IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) 

The IEC published IEC Standard 

62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power,’’ Edition 2.0 2011–01 (IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) or 

‘‘Second Edition’’) on January 27, 2011. 

Consistent with EPCA requirements for 

amending test procedures to include 

standby and off mode procedures (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)), DOE analyzed 

IEC Standard 62301 (Second Edition) for 

today’s NOPR. DOE has reviewed this 

latest draft of the IEC standard and 

believes that it provides for 

improvement for some measurements of 

standby mode and off mode energy use. 

Accordingly, DOE proposes in today’s 

NOPR to incorporate certain provisions 

of the IEC Standard 62301 (Second 

Edition), along with clarifying language, 

into the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure. 

Clarifications to Test Conditions 

DOE received a number of inquiries 

from independent test laboratories 

requesting clarification on testing 

according to the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure. Based on these inquiries, 

DOE is proposing in today’s NOPR to 

amend both 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix D and appendix D1 to clarify 

the cycle settings used for the test cycle 

and the requirements for the gas supply 

for gas clothes dryers. 

III. Discussion 

A. Products Covered by This Test 

Procedure Rulemaking 

Today’s proposed amendments to 

DOE’s clothes dryer test procedure 

cover both electric and gas clothes 

dryers. DOE defines a clothes dryer to 

mean a cabinet-like appliance designed 

to dry fabrics in a tumble-type drum 

with forced air circulation, with 

blower(s) driven by an electric motor(s) 

and either gas or electricity as the heat 

source. 10 CFR 430.2. DOE is not 

proposing in today’s NOPR to change 

the definition for clothes dryers in 

DOE’s regulations. 

B. Automatic Cycle Termination 

In today’s NOPR, DOE is proposing 

amendments to the clothes dryer test 

procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D1 to more accurately 

measure the effects of automatic cycle 

termination. The current DOE test 

procedures for clothes dryers in 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendices D and 

D1 currently require manufacturers to 

apply a field use factor to the per-cycle 

drying energy consumption to 

determine the performance of clothes 

dryers equipped with both automatic 

cycle termination and timers. For dryers 

with automatic termination control, the 

test procedures do not distinguish 

between the type of sensing control 

system (e.g., temperature-sensing or 

moisture-sensing controls) and the 

sophistication and accuracy of the 

control system. Gas or electric clothes 

dryers with time termination control 

(i.e., those dryers equipped with a timer 

to determine the end of a drying cycle) 

are assigned a field use factor of 1.18, 

while dryers with automatic termination 

are assigned a field use factor of 1.04. 

The field use factors are assigned to 

account for drying beyond the 2.5–5 

percent RMC specified in the test 

procedure. The field use factor for timer 

dryers was derived from a field study 

conducted by the Oklahoma Gas and 

Electric Company in 1971, consisting of 

64 households and 33,000 loads of 

clothing, as well as data reported by 

AHAM representing the energy 

consumption in 1972 of 2,983,200 

production units of clothes dryers. 42 

FR 46145, 46146 (Sept. 14, 1977). For 

automatic termination control dryers, 

the field use factor was derived from a 

field study conducted by AHAM in 

1977 involving 72 households. 45 FR 

46762–3 (July 10, 1980); 46 FR 27324 

(May 19, 1981). 

In the January 2011 TP Final Rule, 

DOE did not adopt the amendments to 

more accurately measure automatic 

cycle termination that were originally 

proposed in June 2010 TP SNOPR. 76 

FR 972, 977–78 (Jan. 6, 2011). In that 

June 2010 TP SNOPR, DOE proposed to 

revise its clothes dryer test procedure to 

include definitions of and provisions for 

testing both timer dryers and automatic 

termination control dryers based on the 

methodology provided in Australia/New 

Zealand (AS/NZS) Standard 2442.1: 

1996, ‘‘Performance of household 

electrical appliances—Rotary clothes 

dryers, Part 1: Energy consumption and 

performance’’ (AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1) and AS/NZS Standard 2442.2: 

2000, ‘‘Performance of household 

electrical appliances—Rotary clothes 

dryers, Part 2: Energy labeling 

requirements’’ (AS/NZS Standard 

2442.2). 75 FR 37594, 37598 (June 29, 

2010). DOE proposed to incorporate the 

testing methods from these international 

test standards, along with a number of 

clarifications, to measure the energy 

consumption for both timer dryers and 

automatic termination control dryers. 

The measurement would account for the 

energy consumed by the clothes dryer 

after the load reaches an RMC of 5 

percent. 75 FR 37594, 37599 (June 29, 

2010). The proposed test method in the 

June 2010 TP SNOPR specified that a 

clothes dryer with automatic cycle 

termination controls be tested using the 

‘‘normal’’ cycle setting, and where the 

temperature setting can be chosen 

independently of the program, it would 

be set to the highest level. The clothes 

dryer would then be allowed to run 

until the heater switched off for the final 

time at the end of the drying cycle. If the 

final RMC was higher than 5 percent, 

the test would be re-run using the 

highest dryness level setting. Id. 

In addition to the provisions for 

automatic cycle termination clothes 

dryers, DOE also proposed testing 

methods in the June 2010 TP SNOPR for 

timer dryers based on AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1. The proposed test method 

specified that the clothes dryer be 

operated at the maximum temperature 

setting until the final RMC of the load 

was between 5 and 6 percent. The 

procedure would then be repeated to 

dry the load until the final RMC was 

between 4 and 5 percent, with the 

results from these two tests used to 

interpolate the value of the per-cycle 

energy consumption required to dry the 

test load to exactly 5-percent RMC. 75 

FR 37594, 37617 (June 29, 2010). 

As discussed in the January 2011 TP 

Final Rule, DOE conducted testing of 

representative residential clothes dryers 

using the automatic cycle termination 

test procedure proposed in the June 

2010 TP SNOPR. The results of the 

testing revealed that all of the clothes 

dryers tested significantly over-dried the 

DOE test load to near bone dry and, as 

a result, the measured EF values were 

significantly lower than EF values 

obtained using the existing DOE test 

procedure in appendix D. 76 FR 972, 

977 (Jan. 6, 2011). In the January 2011 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
156 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

7A notation in the form ‘‘Joint Petition, No. 2 at 

pp. 1, 4–5’’ identifies a written comment: (1) Made 

by the Joint Petition; (2) recorded in document 

number 2 that is filed in the docket of the 

residential dishwasher, dehumidifier, and 

conventional cooking products test procedures 

rulemaking (Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–TP–0054) 

and available for review at www.regulations.gov; 

and (3) that appears on pages 1 and 4–5 of 

document number 2. 8 Joint Petition, No. 2 at p. 6 

TP Final Rule, DOE concluded that the 

test procedure amendments for 

automatic cycle termination proposed in 

the June 2010 TP SNOPR do not 

adequately measure the energy 

consumption of clothes dryers equipped 

with such systems using the test load 

specified in the DOE test procedure. 

DOE stated that clothes dryers with 

automatic termination sensing control 

systems, which infer the RMC of the 

load from the properties of the exhaust 

air such as temperature and humidity, 

may be designed to stop the cycle when 

a load of varying weights, composition, 

and size has a higher RMC than the 

RMC obtained using the proposed 

automatic cycle termination test 

procedure in conjunction with the 

existing DOE test load. In considering 

whether other test loads would be 

appropriate to incorporate into the DOE 

test procedure to produce both 

representative and repeatable test 

results, however, DOE noted that 

manufacturers indicated that test load 

types and test cloth materials different 

than those specified in the DOE test 

procedure do not produce results as 

repeatable as those obtained using the 

test load as currently specified. 76 FR 

972, 977 (Jan. 6, 2011). 

1. August 2011 RFI 

As discussed in section I of this 

notice, DOE published the August 2011 

RFI to further investigate the effects of 

automatic cycle termination on the 

energy efficiency. 76 FR 50145 (Aug. 12, 

2011). DOE sought information, data, 

and comments regarding methods for 

more accurately measuring the effects of 

automatic cycle termination in the 

residential clothes dryer test procedure. 

In particular, DOE sought comment on 

the following: (1) The characteristics of 

loads of varying weights, composition, 

and size, (2) the accuracy of different 

automatic cycle termination sensors and 

controls, (3) the target final RMC used 

by manufacturers to maintain consumer 

satisfaction, (4) the effects of the 

characteristics of water (i.e., hardness 

and conductivity) used for wetting the 

test load prior to testing, and (5) the 

cycle settings selected by consumers for 

automatic termination cycles. 

In response to the August 2011 RFI, 

DOE received the ‘‘Joint Petition to 

Amend the Test Procedure for 

Residential Clothes Dryers to Include 

Provisions Related to Automatic 

Termination Controls’’ (the ‘‘Joint 

Petition’’), a comment submitted by 

groups representing manufacturers 

(AHAM, Whirlpool Corporation 

(Whirlpool), General Electric Company 

(GE), Electrolux, LG Electronics, Inc. 

(LG), BSH Home Appliances (BSH), 

Alliance Laundry Systems (ALS), Viking 

Range, Sub-Zero Wolf, Friedrich A/C, 

U-Line, Samsung, Sharp Electronics, 

Miele, Heat Controller, AGA Marvel, 

Brown Stove, Haier, Fagor America, 

Airwell Group, Arcelik, Fisher & Paykel, 

Scotsman Ice, Indesit, Kuppersbusch, 

Kelon, and DeLonghi); energy and 

environmental advocates (American 

Council for an Energy Efficient 

Economy (ACEEE), Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), 

Natural Resources Defense Council 

(NRDC), Alliance to Save Energy (ASE), 

Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE), 

Northwest Power and Conservation 

Council (NPCC), and Northeast Energy 

Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP)); and 

consumer groups (Consumer Federation 

of America (CFA) and the National 

Consumer Law Center (NCLC)) 

(collectively, the ‘‘Joint Petitioners’’). 

The Joint Petitioners commented that 

DOE should amend the clothes dryer 

test procedure to include provisions to 

account for the effectiveness of 

automatic cycle termination. (Joint 

Petition, No. 2 at pp. 1, 4–5) 7

DOE notes that AHAM withdrew its 

support for the petition in a letter dated 

May 29, 2012, stating that the petition 

was predicated on DOE adoption of test 

procedure provisions to account for 

automatic termination controls by 

December 31, 2011. DOE acknowledges 

AHAM’s withdrawal but considers the 

substantive provisions to account for 

such controls in the discussion that 

follows. (AHAM, No. 5 at pp. 1–2) 

The Joint Petitioners recognized 

DOE’s concerns that the amendments 

for automatic cycle termination 

proposed in the June 2010 TP SNOPR 

may not properly measure the 

effectiveness of automatic termination 

controls, particularly in light of data 

that suggested that automatic 

termination control dryers may in fact 

be drying clothes to approximately 5- 

percent RMC rather than the less than 

2-percent RMC resulting from testing 

using the DOE test cloth. The Joint 

Petitioners noted that the DOE test cloth 

is uniform, for purposes of repeatability 

and reproducibility, but likely dries 

faster and more uniformly than a load 

of varying weights, composition, and 

size. (Joint Petition, No. 2 at p. 5) 

As part of the Joint Petition, AHAM 

members provided test data on clothes 

dryers with automatic termination 

controls representing 60 percent of 

shipments, measuring the final RMC at 

the completion of a ‘‘normal’’ automatic 

cycle, including cool down, using the 

DOE test load. The data, presented 

below in Figure III.1, show that all 

tested models had a final RMC below 2 

percent. The Joint Petitioners stated that 

the testing assumed that the current 

market ending RMC is appropriate. The 

Joint Petitioners commented that the 

test results demonstrated that an ending 

RMC of 2 percent using the DOE test 

cloth best approximates the maximum 

consumer-accepted final RMC. (Joint 

Petition, No. 2 at pp. 5–6) 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 157 

Based on this data, the Joint 

Petitioners stated that DOE should 

amend the clothes dryer test procedure 

to include the full automatic 

termination cycle, including cool down. 

The Joint Petitioners stated that testing 

the entire cycle is more representative of 

actual consumer use and is less of a test 

burden for manufacturers than DOE’s 

proposal in the June 2010 TP SNOPR to 

stop the dryer when the heater switches 

off for the final time at the end of the 

drying cycle. In addition, the Joint 

Petitioners commented that the test 

procedure should be amended to state 

that the final RMC when testing units 

with automatic termination controls 

shall be no more than 2 percent when 

testing with the DOE test load to be 

representative of clothes dryers 

currently on the market. Any test in 

which the final RMC is 2 percent or less 

should be considered valid. If the final 

RMC is greater than 2 percent, the test 

would be invalid and a new test run 

would be conducted using the highest 

dryness level setting. (Joint Petition, No. 

2 at p. 6) 

ALS commented that it supports the 

continued use of the DOE test cloth and 

that attempting to use the IEC/AHAM 

test load that is composed of more allcotton material of varying shapes and 

sizes will add more variability and 

uncertainty to the test results. ALS 

stated that the DOE test procedure needs 

to be repeatable, and that changing to a 

different test cloth is not appropriate. 

(ALS, No. 3 at p. 1) 

2. Product Testing 

To evaluate potential amendments for 

automatic cycle termination, DOE 

selected a representative sample of 20 

clothes dryers encompassing all clothes 

dryer product classes. DOE considered 

features such as rated energy factor, 

rated capacity, control type (i.e., 

electromechanical versus electronic), 

and automatic cycle termination sensor 

technology (if advertised) when 

selecting units to be most representative 

of products currently available on the 

U.S. market. The test units and key 

features are presented below in Table 

III.1. Unless otherwise noted, the test 

unit numbers presented in Table III.1 

are used in other tables of results in 

today’s notice. 

TABLE III.1—CLOTHES DRYER TEST UNITS AND FEATURES

Product class Test unit Rated EF 1

(lbs/kWh) Drum airflow direction Controls Sensor type 

Vented Electric Standard ........... 1 3.1 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

2 3.19 Back to Front ............................ ElectroMechanical .................... Temp 

3 3.03 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

4 3.04 Back to Back ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

5 3.4 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

6 3.1 Back to Back ............................ ElectroMechanical .................... Moisture 

7 3.1 Back to Back ............................ ElectroMechanical .................... Moisture 

8 3.08 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

Vented Electric Compact (240 

Volt (V)).

9 2.95 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

10 2.98 Back to Back ............................ ElectroMechanical .................... Temp 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) 11 3.15 Back to Back ............................ ElectroMechanical .................... Moisture 

Vented Gas ................................ 12 2.77 Back to Front ............................ ElectroMechanical .................... Temp 

13 2.68 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

14 2.71 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

15 2.85 Back to Back ............................ Electromechanical .................... Moisture 

16 2.76 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

17 2.8 Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

Ventless Electric Compact 

(240V).

18 Not Listed Back to Front ............................ Electronic .................................. Moisture 

Ventless Electric Combination 

Washer/Dryer.

19 Not Listed Front to Back ............................ Electronic .................................. None— 

Timed 

Dry Only 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with EP02JA13.013</GPH>
158 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE III.1—CLOTHES DRYER TEST UNITS AND FEATURES—Continued 

Product class Test unit Rated EF 1

(lbs/kWh) Drum airflow direction Controls Sensor type 

20 Not Listed Front to Back ............................ Electronic .................................. Temp 

1The Rated EF is based on the DOE clothes dryer test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D. 

DOE initially conducted testing for all 

test units according to the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1. Appendix D1 

requires that the DOE test load, initially 

soaked with an RMC of 57.5 ± 3.5 

percent, be dried using the timed dry 

and maximum temperature settings 

until the test load has reached a final 

RMC of 2.5 to 5 percent without 

allowing the dryer to advance into a 

cool-down phase. A field use factor is 

then applied to the measured per-cycle 

energy consumption to account for the 

over-drying energy consumption 

associated with the use of either timer 

clothes dryers or automatic cycle 

termination clothes dryers. DOE then 

conducted testing of these units using 

automatic cycle termination test 

methodologies with different test loads 

to evaluate the effects of these potential 

test procedure amendments on the 

measured efficiency as compared to the 

existing DOE test procedure in 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix D1. DOE 

also conducted additional testing to 

evaluate repeatability and 

reproducibility of the test results. 

In conducting the testing, DOE used 

the DOE test load and the test load 

specified in both the AHAM clothes 

dryer test standard HLD–1–2009, 

‘‘Household Tumble Type Clothes 

Dryers,’’ and the IEC test standard 

61121, ‘‘Tumble dryers for household 

use—Methods for measuring the 

performance,’’ Edition 3 (2005), which 

consists of cotton bed sheets, towels, 

and pillowcases. DOE concluded in the 

August 2011 RFI that clothes dryers 

with automatic termination sensing 

control systems may be designed to stop 

the cycle when a load of varying 

weights, composition, and size has a 

higher RMC than the RMC obtained 

using the automatic termination drying 

cycle in conjunction with the existing 

DOE test load. 76 FR 50145, 50146 (Aug. 

12, 2011). In addition, the Northwest 

Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) 

supplied DOE with data from a 

residential laundry field use study that 

NEEA conducted. The field study, 

which included 50 households in the 

northwest United States metered from 

January 2012 to March 2012, gathered 

data on the energy use and usage habits 

for residential clothes dryers, including 

information on the type of fabrics 

composing household laundry loads for 

each laundry cycle. The data, presented 

below in Table III.2, show the frequency 

of various load compositions, ranging 

from ‘‘light’’ to ‘‘heavy,’’ for the average 

household surveyed. 

TABLE III.2—LAUNDRY LOAD FABRIC

COMPOSITION FOR THE AVERAGE

HOUSEHOLD SURVEYED IN THE

NEEA FIELD USE STUDY

Laundry load description 

Percentage of 

laundry cycles 

for average 

household surveyed (%) 

Light .................................... 6.8 

Mixed Light/Medium ........... 19.9 

Medium ............................... 23.5 

Mixed Light/Medium/Heavy 13.1 

Mixed Medium/Heavy ......... 23.3 

Heavy .................................. 13.5 

Light = permanent press, light socks, light/ 

casual shirts, pillow cases, underwear, light 

weight/smaller sheets. 

Medium = heavy shirts, medium weight/larger sheets, casual pants, light weight 

sweatpants and shirts, heavy socks, pullovers. 

Heavy = towels, heavy work clothing, flannel 

sheets, heavy sweatpants and shirts, jeans. 

DOE conducted the testing for the 

proposed automatic cycle termination 

test methodology according to the DOE 

test procedure, with the following 

modifications. The test load was 

prepared with a starting RMC of 57.5 

percent ± 0.33 percent. The controls 

were set as follows: 

• Instead of using the timed dry cycle 

setting, the ‘‘normal’’ automatic 

termination cycle setting was selected. If 

a ‘‘normal’’ cycle setting was not 

provided, then the test cycle 

recommended by manufacturers for 

drying cotton or linen clothes was used. 

• Where the temperature setting 

could be chosen independently of the 

program, the highest level was selected. 

• Where the dryness level setting 

could be chosen independently of the 

program, it was set to the ‘‘normal’’ or 

‘‘medium’’ level. If such designation 

was not provided, then the dryness level 

was set at the mid-point between the 

minimum and maximum settings. 

The clothes dryer was then allowed to 

run until the completion of the cycle, 

including the cool-down period. At the 

completion of the cycle, the clothes 

were weighed to determine the final 

RMC. If the final RMC was below 2 

percent for the DOE test load, the test 

was considered valid. If the RMC was 

higher than 2 percent (i.e., the test load 

contained more moisture than would be 

acceptable to consumers), the test was 

considered invalid and was re-run using 

the highest dryness level setting. DOE 

selected the 2-percent RMC threshold 

based on data presented in the Joint 

Petitioners’ comment regarding RMC 

levels acceptable to consumers, 

discussed above. For the IEC/AHAM 

test load, similar test conditions were 

applied except that the threshold value 

for the final RMC was changed from 2 

percent to 5 percent because of the more 

varied composition of the IEC/AHAM 

test load. 

Table III.3 presents the key features of 

the automatic cycle termination testing 

methodology as compared to the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure in 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix D1. 

TABLE III.3—TESTS METHODS FOR DOE TESTING

Test condition DOE test 

procedure 

(Appendix D1) 

Automatic cycle termination testing 

methodology 

Test Load 

DOE DOE IEC/AHAM 

Permitted Number of Test Runs per Test 

Cloth.

Less than 25 test runs for 

individual test cloth.

Less than 25 test runs for 

individual test cloth.

Less than 80 test runs for individual test 

cloth. Weighted average age of test load 

between 30 and 50 test runs. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 159 

TABLE III.3—TESTS METHODS FOR DOE TESTING—Continued 

Test condition DOE test 

procedure 

(Appendix D1) 

Automatic cycle termination testing 

methodology 

Test Load 

DOE DOE IEC/AHAM 

Test Load Preconditioning .......................... 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D1, section 2.6.3.

10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D1, section 2.6.3.

AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009 Section 

3.2.3. 

Test Load Normalization ............................. N/A .................................. N/A .................................. After each 9 test cycles, normalize using 

AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009 Section 

3.2.3. 

Cycle and Settings Used for Test ............... Timed Dry Cycle, Maximum Temperature (if 

separately selectable).

‘‘Normal’’ Automatic Dry Cycle; Maximum Temperature (if separately 

selectable); ‘‘Normal’’ or ‘‘Medium’’ Dryness (or, if no such designations, at mid-point between min. and max. settings) 

Starting RMC of Test Load ......................... 57.5 ± 3.5 percent ........... 57.5 ± 0.33 percent 

RMC of Test Load at Which Test is 

Stopped.

Stopped manually at 2.5– 

5 percent RMC.

Allowed to run until completion of automatic 

cycle. Must be below 

2-percent RMC or additional test with highest 

dryness level setting 

must be run.

Allowed to run until completion of automatic cycle. Must be below 5-percent 

RMC or additional test with highest dryness level setting must be run. 

Cool Down ................................................... Clothes dryer not permitted to advance into 

cool down.

Cool down period included in automatic cycle test 

Field Use Factor (multiplied by per-cycle 

energy consumption to account for over 

drying).

= 1.04 for automatic 

cycle termination dryers = 1.18 for timer 

dryers.

No field use factor for automatic cycle termination dryers. = 1.18 for 

timer dryers 

For each specific testing methodology 

described above, DOE conducted a 

series of three identical tests for each 

model to evaluate the repeatability of 

test results. The results, presented in 

Table III.4, show both the average 

measured CEF for each test unit and the 

percentage change in the measured CEF 

for the automatic cycle termination tests 

as compared to appendix D1. For the 

automatic cycle termination tests using 

the DOE test load, all of the tests 

resulted in a lower measured CEF (i.e., 

higher per-cycle energy use) compared 

to the DOE test procedure, ranging from 

a 3.5 percent to 41.9 percent decrease in 

CEF. Similarly, for the automatic cycle 

termination tests using the IEC/AHAM 

test load, all of the tests resulted in a 

lower measured CEF compared to the 

DOE test procedure, ranging from a 6.1 

percent to 40.3 percent decrease. In 

addition, the majority of tested units 

had a lower CEF for the automatic cycle 

termination test with the IEC/AHAM 

test load than with the DOE test load. 

DOE notes that for this series of tests, it 

did not make any modifications to the 

water used to wet the test loads. As 

discussed in section III.B.4 of this 

notice, DOE subsequently conducted 

testing with modifications to the water 

used to wet the test loads. 

TABLE III.4—DOE TEST PROCEDURE AND AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST RESULTS

Product class Test unit 

DOE test procedure (Appendix D1) Automatic cycle termination— 

DOE test load 

Automatic cycle termination— 

IEC/AHAM test load 

CEF (lbs/kWh) CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change 

Vented Electric Standard ......................... 1 3.58 3.16 ¥11.6 3.13 ¥12.6 

2 3.93 2.73 ¥30.6 2.76 ¥29.8 

3 3.83 3.49 ¥9.1 3.08 ¥19.6 

4 3.71 3.48 ¥6.1 3.44 ¥7.3 

5 3.90 3.51 ¥10.0 3.40 ¥12.9 

6 3.80 2.71 ¥28.7 2.42 ¥36.3 

7 3.84 3.06 ¥20.2 3.02 ¥21.3 

8 3.71 3.11 ¥16.1 2.97 ¥19.9 

Avg 3.79 3.16 ¥16.6 3.03 ¥20.0 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ............. 9 3.53 3.32 ¥6.1 3.24 ¥8.4 

10 3.56 2.27 ¥36.1 2.12 ¥40.3 

Avg 3.54 2.79 ¥21.1 2.68 ¥24.4 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ............. 11 3.75 2.18 ¥41.9 2.42 ¥35.6 

Vented Gas .............................................. 12 3.43 2.70 ¥21.3 2.66 ¥22.4 

13 3.31 2.87 ¥13.3 2.64 ¥20.2 

14 3.49 3.07 ¥12.0 2.93 ¥16.2 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
160 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE III.4—DOE TEST PROCEDURE AND AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST RESULTS—Continued 

Product class Test unit 

DOE test procedure (Appendix D1) Automatic cycle termination— 

DOE test load 

Automatic cycle termination— 

IEC/AHAM test load 

CEF (lbs/kWh) CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change 

15 3.39 2.69 ¥20.5 2.64 ¥22.0 

16 3.37 3.25 ¥3.5 2.99 ¥11.0 

17 3.37 2.94 ¥12.7 2.89 ¥14.3 

Avg 3.39 2.92 ¥13.9 2.79 ¥17.7 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.98 2.73 ¥8.4 2.63 ¥11.9 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/ 

Dryer ..................................................... 19 2.81 2.70 ¥3.9 2.44 ¥13.3 

20 2.28 2.191 ¥3.9 2.14 ¥6.1 

Avg 2.54 2.45 ¥3.9 2.29 ¥9.7 

Table III.5 presents the average final 

RMC from the automatic cycle 

termination tests with both the DOE and 

IEC/AHAM test loads, as well as the 

cycle settings used for each test unit. 

DOE notes that for nearly all of the test 

units, the average final RMC is higher 

for the tests using the IEC/AHAM test 

load. The higher measured per-cycle 

energy use and final RMC for the IEC/ 

AHAM test load compared to the DOE 

test load is likely due to the ability of 

the IEC/AHAM test load to retain more 

water during the drying process than the 

DOE test load, which gives off moisture 

more readily and terminates the drying 

cycle sooner. In addition, as discussed 

above, clothes dryers with automatic 

termination sensing control systems 

may be designed to stop the cycle when 

a load of varying weights, composition, 

and size has a higher RMC than the 

RMC obtained using the DOE test load. 

TABLE III.5—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST RESULTS—FINAL RMC 

Product class Test unit Automatic cycle 

setting 

Automatic cycle termination— 

final RMC (%) 

DOE load IEC/AHAM 

load 

Vented Electric Standard ................................ 1 Normal Cycle, High Temp, Normal Dry ......... 1.3 2.2 

2 Cottons Cycle, High Heat, Optimum Dry ....... 0.7 1.5 

3 Cotton/Normal Cycle, Medium Heat, Normal 

Dry.

0.6 1.3 

4 Sensor Normal Cycle, Medium Temp ............ 0.7 3.1 

5 Normal Cycle .................................................. 0.9 3.9 

6 Energy Preferred Plus Cycle, High Temp ..... 1.9 2.4 

7 Energy Preferred Plus Cycle, High Heat ....... 1.3 1.5 

8 Normal Cycle, Medium Heat, Normal Dry ..... 0.4 1.6 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) .................... 9 Cottons Cycle, High Temp, Sensor Dry ........ 1.3 4.3 

10 Perm Press/Normal ........................................ 2.0 3.2 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) .................... 11 Perm Press .................................................... 2.0 2.5 

Vented Gas ..................................................... 12 Cottons Regular Cycle, Optimum Dry ........... 1.8 1.6 

13 Normal Cycle, High Temp, Normal Dry ......... 0.9 1.9 

14 Normal Cycle, Medium Heat, Normal Dry ..... 0.7 1.6 

15 Energy Preferred Plus Cycle, High Temp ..... 1.3 2.2 

16 Normal Cycle, Medium Temp, Normal Dry .... 0.8 2.6 

17 Normal Cycle, Medium Temp, Normal Dry .... 0.9 2.3 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) .................. 18 Cottons Cycle, High Temp, More Dry1 .......... 2.0 4.7 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/Dryer 19 Timed Dry Only .............................................. ........................ ........................

20 Normal Dry ..................................................... 1.7 3.4 

1Original test using Cottons Cycle, High Temp, Normal Dry gave an average RMC of 3.1 percent for DOE test load, with all tests above 2-percent RMC. As a result, test was re-run using highest dryness setting. 

As noted in section III.B.1 of this 

notice, manufacturers have indicated 

that test load types and test cloth 

materials different than those specified 

in the DOE test procedure do not 

produce results as repeatable as those 

obtained using the DOE test load. 

Therefore, for each test unit, DOE 

examined the test-to-test variation in 

CEF among the three tests conducted 

using the DOE test procedure and 

among the three tests using the 

automatic cycle termination test 

methodology. Table III.6 presents the 

test-to-test variation expressed as the 

percent standard error. The analysis 

shows that the test-to-test variation for 

the automatic cycle termination tests 

with the DOE test load is slightly lower 

than the test-to-test variation with the 

IEC/AHAM test load, and that both are 

higher than the test-to-test variation for 

the DOE test procedure. DOE notes that 

the more consistent results for the 

current DOE test procedure are likely 

due to the use of the timed dry cycle 

rather than the automatic termination 

cycles, which may have additional 

variation in results due to the 

performance of temperature and 

moisture sensors and the automatic 

termination control strategies. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 161 

TABLE III.6—CEF TEST-TO-TEST VARIATION

Product class Test unit 

CEF test-to-test variation standard error (%) 

DOE test 

procedure 

(Appendix D1) 

Automatic 

cycle termination—DOE 

test load 

Automatic 

cycle termination—IEC/ 

AHAM test 

load 

Vented Electric Standard ................................................................................. 1 1.35 0.50 2.26 

2 0.57 2.95 0.50 

3 0.89 1.46 0.62 

4 0.37 1.14 6.44 

5 1.02 2.10 0.77 

6 0.46 0.72 3.68 

7 0.70 2.20 1.59 

8 1.12 0.16 1.73 

Avg 0.81 1.40 2.20 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ..................................................................... 9 1.60 4.25 2.42 

10 0.18 5.70 4.39 

Avg 0.89 4.98 3.40 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ..................................................................... 11 0.51 2.12 2.25 

Vented Gas ...................................................................................................... 12 1.31 0.48 3.07 

13 0.82 0.81 1.95 

14 2.08 1.58 0.92 

15 1.23 2.08 1.73 

16 0.61 0.68 1.91 

17 0.52 2.73 1.94 

Avg 1.10 1.39 1.92 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ................................................................... 18 0.32 2.00 1.50 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/Dryer .................................................. 19 0.75 0.55 0.16 

20 0.90 3.22 1.58 

Avg 0.82 1.88 0.87 

Total Average ........................................................................................... ........................ 0.87 1.87 2.07 

To evaluate the effect of test load 

composition on repeatability, DOE then 

ran appendix D1 again for a subset of 10 

of the clothes dryers in its test sample, 

using the IEC/AHAM test cloth instead 

of the DOE test cloth. For each of these 

units, DOE conducted three repeat tests. 

DOE believes that using the timed dry 

cycle and requiring that the dryer be 

stopped manually allow for better 

evaluation of the actual test load by 

limiting other factors, such as automatic 

termination sensor performance, that 

may contribute to variability of results 

from test to test. The results from this 

testing, presented in Table III.7, show an 

average test-to-test variation in CEF 

(expressed in terms of standard error) of 

1.02 percent for the IEC/AHAM test load 

as compared to the 0.87 percent test-totest variation for the DOE timed dry test 

procedure with the DOE test load, 

presented above in Table III.6. 

TABLE III.7—CEF TEST-TO-TEST VARIATION FOR APPENDIX D1 WITH IEC/AHAM TEST LOADS

Product class Test unit 

Timed dry—IEC/ 

AHAM test load— 

CEF test-to-test 

standard error (%) 

Vented Electric Standard ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.42 

3 1.21 

6 1.28 

8 0.96 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ....................................................................................................................... 9 0.90 

10 1.28 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ....................................................................................................................... 11 0.31 

Vented Gas ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 1.17 

14 1.10 

17 0.55 

Average .............................................................................................................................................................. ........................ 1.02 

DOE notes that in addition to the use 

of the IEC/AHAM test load producing 

less repeatable results from test to test, 

the reproducibility of test results from 

lab to lab must also be considered 

because different test laboratories may 

be using different lots of test cloth. To 

evaluate the reproducibility of test 

results from lab to lab, DOE conducted 

testing of 9 units at an independent test 

laboratory with different lots of the DOE 

and IEC/AHAM test loads using the 

automatic cycle termination test 

method. The results, presented below in 

Table III.8, show that the use of the IEC/ 

AHAM test load also results in lower 

reproducibility of test results than the 

use of the existing DOE test load. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
162 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE III.8—LAB-TO-LAB REPRODUCIBILITY OF AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST RESULTS

Product class Test unit 

Automatic cycle termination, DOE test 

load—average CEF 

Automatic cycle termination, IEC/AHAM 

Test load—average CEF 

DOE lab Independent 

lab 

% 

Difference DOE lab Independent lab 

% 

Difference 

Vented Electric Standard ......................... 1 3.10 3.16 2.2 2.85 3.13 9.8 

2 2.73 3.02 10.8 2.76 2.79 1.0 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ............. 10 2.26 2.27 0.3 2.12 2.12 0.0 

Vented Gas .............................................. 13 2.86 2.87 0.4 2.87 2.64 7.8 

15 2.72 2.69 1.0 2.73 2.64 3.2 

16 3.29 3.25 1.2 3.23 2.99 7.2 

17 3.03 2.94 2.8 3.03 2.89 4.5 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.90 2.73 6.0 2.74 2.63 4.2 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/ 

Dryer ..................................................... 20 2.19 2.23 2.0 Not Tested Not Tested ....................

Average .................................................... .................... .................... .................... 3.0 .................... .................... 4.7 

3. Energy Consumption Versus RMC 

As noted in section III.B.2 of this 

notice, the automatic cycle termination 

test method using the DOE test load 

resulted in a lower measured CEF value 

compared to the CEF measured using 

appendix D1. As part of the automatic 

cycle termination testing discussed in 

section III.B.2, DOE tested a number of 

units in the test sample at an 

independent test laboratory that 

measured and recorded the energy 

consumption and an estimated 

instantaneous RMC of the test load 

throughout the test cycle. The estimated 

RMC was determined based on the 

weight of the test load, measured in 

place during the test cycle, and the 

rotation of the drum. Based on this 

testing, DOE decided to develop a field 

use factor to account for the over-drying 

energy consumption using the 

automatic cycle termination test method 

with the DOE test load at the end of the 

cycle when the load is dried below 2- 

percent RMC. 

Using the independent test 

laboratory’s data, DOE evaluated the 

measured energy consumption at 

different times during the cycle—when 

the test load initially reached 5-percent 

RMC, when it reached 2-percent RMC, 

and at the end of the cycle (including 

cool down). The test data, presented 

below in Table III.9, show that the 

energy consumption measured over a 

full automatic termination dry cycle is 

11–72 percent greater than the energy 

consumption during the test cycle when 

the test load initially reaches 5-percent 

RMC, and 4–62 percent greater than the 

energy consumption when the test load 

initially reaches 2-percent RMC (before 

any moisture regain during cool down/ 

tumbling). DOE also noted that while 

the final RMC of the DOE test load using 

the automatic cycle termination test 

method was between 0.4 percent and 

2.0 percent at the completion of the test 

cycle for all of the clothes dryers in 

DOE’s test sample, this RMC was 

achieved either after the end of a cooldown period, during which the dryer 

tumbles with no added heat after the 

conclusion of the heated drying, or after 

an extended period of operation at 

nearly 0-percent RMC when the heater 

is cycled off and on. The independent 

test laboratory’s data showed that 

during cool-down or non-heated 

tumbling, the test load regains moisture 

from the room air. As a result, the final 

RMC of the test load at the completion 

of the cycle after the cool-down/ 

tumbling period is higher than the RMC 

of the load when the heater turns off for 

the final time. 

TABLE III.9—MEASURED AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION ENERGY CONSUMPTION AT SPECIFIC RMC LEVELS

Product class Test unit Automatic cycle termination sensor 

technology 

Energy consumption (kWh) 

5% RMC 2% RMC 

End of cycle 

(measured 

RMC (%) 1

Vented Electric Standard .................... 1 Moisture .............................................. 1.945 2.070 2.624 (1.2) 

2 Temperature ....................................... 2.068 2.233 3.119 (0.9) 

4 Moisture .............................................. 2.160 2.318 2.405 (0.7) 

6 Moisture .............................................. 2.091 2.280 3.141 (1.9) 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ........ 10 Temperature ....................................... 0.823 0.875 1.418 (2.0) 

Vented Gas ......................................... 13 Moisture .............................................. 2.375 2.569 2.905 (0.8) 

15 Moisture .............................................. 2.347 2.532 3.161 (1.2) 

17 Moisture .............................................. 2.300 2.482 2.843 (1.2) 

1As noted above, the test load regained moisture during the cool-down/tumbling period. 

Figure III.2 presents the measured 

energy consumption during the test 

cycle for the units tested at the 

independent testing laboratory. The 

regions of the graphs that have a nearly 

horizontal slope correspond to periods 

when the clothes dryer is tumbling with 

no heat. DOE notes that most clothes 

dryers have a temperature set point, 

likely based on measurements from a 

temperature sensor in the exhaust duct, 

at which point the heater will cycle on 

and off. At the end of the cycle, the 

nearly horizontal slope corresponds to 

the cool-down period. 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 163 

Figure III.3 through Figure III.5 

present, for each product class, the latter 

part of the test cycle when the test load 

is nearly dry. Each curve starts where 

the test load has initially reached 5- 

percent RMC. The curves also identify 

where the test load initially reaches 2- 

percent RMC. DOE noted that for all of 

the dryers tested at the independent test 

laboratory, the DOE test load reached 2- 

percent RMC before the clothes dryer 

initially began cycling the heater on and 

off. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with EP02JA13.001</GPH>
164 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with EP02JA13.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 165 

Figure III.6 shows the measured 

energy consumption as a function of 

RMC for the portion of the test cycle 

below 5-percent RMC for two vented 

electric standard clothes dryers. The 

cycles proceed in time from the right 

side of the curves, with the RMC 

generally decreasing as energy 

consumption increases until the start of 

any cool down or tumbling. The data 

show that the cool-down/tumbling 

period can contribute a significant 

amount of energy consumption 

associated with over-drying and 

moisture regain when using the DOE 

test load. DOE observed that these two 

test units, both of which used the same 

moisture sensor technology and dried 

the test load to final RMCs of close to 

1 percent at the end of the cycle, had 

significantly different total measured 

energy consumption. One of these test 

units achieved this final RMC with only 

a brief cool-down period, while the 

other test unit repeatedly heated, 

tumbled, and regained moisture before 

the final cool down. DOE believes that 

the difference in energy consumption 

between these two units is most likely 

a function of the control strategy rather 

than the accuracy of the sensors. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with EP02JA13.003</GPH>
166 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

9The apparent excursions below 0-percent RMC 

result from the method used to calculate 

instantaneous RMC, which may be less accurate at 

very low RMCs. 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–C 

DOE conducted further analysis to 

develop an appropriate field use factor 

to account for the measured energy 

consumption at the end of the automatic 

termination cycle below 2-percent RMC 

using the DOE test load (including any 

cool-down/tumbling period). Using the 

data presented in Table III.9, DOE 

calculated a field use factor of 0.80 for 

automatic termination control dryers by 

taking the average of the difference 

between the measured energy 

consumption to initially reach 2-percent 

RMC and the measured energy 

consumption at the end of the test cycle. 

The results of this analysis showing the 

application of the 0.8 field use factor are 

presented in Table III.10. 

TABLE III.10—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST RESULTS WITH ADJUSTED FIELD USE FACTOR

Product class Test unit 

Per-cycle energy consumption (kWh) 

2% RMC End of test— 

measured 

End of test— 

field adjusted 

Vented Electric Standard ................................................................................. 1 2.070 2.624 2.099 

2 2.233 3.119 2.495 

4 2.318 2.405 1.924 

6 2.280 3.141 2.513 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ..................................................................... 10 0.875 1.418 1.134 

Vented Gas ...................................................................................................... 13 2.569 2.905 2.324 

15 2.532 3.161 2.528 

17 2.482 2.843 2.274 

4. Water Supply Testing 

In the August 2011 RFI, DOE noted 

that the IEC is currently revising its test 

standard for clothes dryers, IEC 

Standard 61121. 76 FR 50145, 50147 

(Aug. 12, 2011). As part of the IEC 

Standard 61121 Fourth Edition 

Committee Draft for Vote (IEC Standard 

61121 CDV), the most recent version 

available at the time of the August 2011 

RFI analysis, the IEC noted that the 

characteristics of the water used for 

wetting the test load prior to the test, 

particularly the conductivity, can 

influence the test results when testing 

automatic cycle termination clothes 

dryers with moisture sensors. Clothes 

dryers with moisture sensors use 

conductivity sensor bars to determine 

the amount of moisture in the load 

when the load comes in contact with the 

sensors. DOE more recently learned that 

IEC Standard 61121 Fourth Edition 

published in February 2012 using the 

same methodology provided in IEC 

Standard 61121 CDV. Table III.11 

provides the characteristics of either soft 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with EP02JA13.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 167 

10 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1, 

section 2.6.3 requires the use of soft water with 17 

parts per million hardness or less. 

or hard water to be used for appliance 

testing under IEC Standard 61121. 

TABLE III.11—IEC STANDARD 61121 REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPOSITION OF SOFT AND HARD WATER FOR CLOTHES

DRYER TESTING

Property Unit 

Water type 

Standard soft water Standard hard water 

Total hardness .............................................. Millimols per liter (mmol/l) (Ca2+/Mg2+) ........ 0.50 ± 0.20 2.50 ± 0.20 

Conductivity (at 20 °C) ................................. Microsiemens per centimeter (μS/cm) ......... 150 ± 50 750 ± 150 

In the August 2011 RFI, DOE 

requested information and data on these 

effects of the characteristics of the water 

used to wet the test load on the 

measured efficiency, as well as any 

potential testing burden associated with 

the requirements for modifying the 

water supply used for wetting the test 

load. DOE did not receive any 

comments or information on this issue. 

DOE conducted testing to evaluate the 

effects of using supply water modified 

to meet the specifications in the IEC 

Standard 61121 on the measured 

efficiency compared to using supply 

water according to the requirements of 

appendix D1. For this series of tests, 

DOE conducted tests on 16 units using 

the same automatic cycle termination 

methodology presented in Table III.3, 

except that the water used to wet the 

test load prior to the test met the 

conditions presented in Table III.8 for 

standard soft water. DOE selected the 

soft water requirements from IEC 

Standard 61121 rather than the hard 

water requirements to more closely 

match the existing DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure, which also requires the 

use of soft water.10 For each test 

method, DOE again conducted three 

identical tests for each test units. The 

test results, presented in Table III.12 

and Table III.13, did not show a 

correlation between the average 

measured CEF and water supply 

specifications for the automatic cycle 

termination tests with either the DOE or 

IEC/AHAM test loads. 

TABLE III.12—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS—WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION—DOE TEST CLOTH

Product class Test unit 

Appendix D1 Automatic cycle termination, Appendix D1 water—DOE test 

cloth 

Automatic cycle termination, 

IEC soft water—DOE test cloth 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change 

Vented Electric Standard ......................... 1 3.58 3.16 ¥11.6 3.15 ¥11.9 

3 3.83 3.49 ¥9.1 3.44 ¥10.3 

4 3.71 3.48 ¥6.1 3.45 ¥6.9 

6 3.80 2.71 ¥28.7 2.68 ¥29.5 

7 3.84 3.06 ¥20.2 3.05 ¥20.7 

8 3.71 3.11 ¥16.1 3.24 ¥12.9 

Avg 3.75 3.17 ¥15.3 3.17 ¥15.3 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ............. 9 3.53 3.32 ¥6.1 3.32 ¥6.2 

10 3.56 2.27 ¥36.1 2.37 ¥33.4 

Avg 3.54 2.79 ¥21.1 2.84 ¥19.8 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ............. 11 3.75 2.18 ¥41.9 2.27 ¥39.6 

Vented Gas .............................................. 13 3.31 2.87 ¥13.3 2.91 ¥12.2 

14 3.49 3.07 ¥12.0 3.24 ¥7.3 

15 3.39 2.69 ¥20.5 2.77 ¥18.2 

16 3.37 3.25 ¥3.5 Not Tested Not Tested 

17 3.37 2.94 ¥12.7 2.92 ¥13.2 

Avg 3.39 2.97 ¥12.4 2.96 ¥12.7 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.98 2.73 ¥8.4 2.85 ¥4.3 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/ 

Dryer ..................................................... 20 2.28 2.19 ¥3.9 2.19 ¥3.9 

TABLE III.13—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS—WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION—IEC/AHAM TEST CLOTH

Product class Test unit 

Appendix D1 Automatic cycle termination, 

Appendix D1 water—IEC/AHAM 

test cloth 

Automatic cycle termination, 

IEC soft water—IEC/AHAM 

test cloth 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change 

Vented Electric Standard ......................... 1 3.58 3.13 ¥12.6 3.16 ¥11.8 

3 3.83 3.08 ¥19.6 3.13 ¥18.3 

4 3.71 3.44 ¥7.3 3.49 ¥5.8 

6 3.80 2.42 ¥36.3 2.58 ¥32.2 

7 3.84 3.02 ¥21.3 2.96 ¥23.0 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
168 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE III.13—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS—WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION—IEC/AHAM TEST CLOTH— 

Continued 

Product class Test unit 

Appendix D1 Automatic cycle termination, 

Appendix D1 water—IEC/AHAM 

test cloth 

Automatic cycle termination, 

IEC soft water—IEC/AHAM 

test cloth 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change CEF (lbs/kWh) % Change 

8 3.71 2.97 ¥19.9 3.02 ¥18.5 

Avg 3.75 3.01 ¥19.5 3.06 ¥18.3 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ............. 9 3.53 3.24 ¥8.4 3.22 ¥8.8 

10 3.56 2.12 ¥40.3 2.05 ¥42.3 

Avg 3.54 2.68 ¥24.4 2.64 ¥25.5 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ............. 11 3.75 2.42 ¥35.6 2.48 ¥33.8 

Vented Gas .............................................. 13 3.31 2.64 ¥20.2 2.73 ¥17.5 

14 3.49 2.93 ¥16.2 2.82 ¥19.2 

15 3.39 2.64 ¥22.0 2.74 ¥19.3 

16 3.37 2.99 ¥11.0 3.08 ¥8.3 

17 3.37 2.89 ¥14.3 2.85 ¥15.3 

Avg 3.39 2.82 ¥16.7 2.85 ¥15.9 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.98 2.63 ¥11.9 2.81 ¥5.6 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/ 

Dryer ..................................................... 20 2.28 2.14 ¥6.1 2.15 ¥5.8 

Table III.14 presents the average final 

RMC for water supply investigative 

tests. Similar to the measured CEF 

discussed above, there was no definitive 

correlation between the average 

measured final RMC and the water 

supply specifications. 

TABLE III.14—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS—WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION—FINAL RMC 

Product class Test unit 

Final RMC (%) 

DOE test cloth IEC/AHAM test cloth 

Appendix 

D1 water 

IEC soft 

water % Change Appendix D1 water 

IEC soft 

water % Change 

Vented Electric Standard ......................... 1 1.3 1.2 ¥7.7 2.2 2.2 0.0 

3 0.6 0.6 0.0 1.3 1.2 ¥7.7 

4 0.7 0.8 14.3 3.1 3.5 12.9 

6 1.9 1.9 0.0 2.4 2.7 12.5 

7 1.3 1.1 ¥15.4 1.5 1.2 ¥20.0 

8 0.4 0.5 25.0 1.6 1.3 ¥18.8 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ............. 9 1.3 1.3 0.0 4.3 4.4 2.3 

10 2.0 2.0 0.0 3.2 3.3 3.1 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ............. 11 2.0 1.5 ¥25.0 2.5 2.1 ¥16.0 

Vented Gas .............................................. 13 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 

14 0.7 0.8 14.3 1.6 1.6 0.0 

15 1.3 1.5 15.4 2.2 2.2 0.0 

16 0.8 Not Tested .................... 2.6 2.7 3.8 

17 0.9 0.9 0.0 2.3 1.9 ¥17.4 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.0 2.4 20.0 4.7 7.1 51.1 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/ 

Dryer ..................................................... 20 1.7 1.5 ¥11.8 3.4 3.4 0.0 

Table III.15 presents the test-to-test 

variation for each water supply 

investigative test. DOE noted that there 

was again no definitive correlation 

between the test-to-test variation and 

whether the water supply was 

unmodified or modified. 

TABLE III.15—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS—WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION—CEF TEST-TO-TEST VARIATION

Product class Test unit 

CEF Test-to-test variation standard error (%) 

DOE Test cloth IEC/AHAM Test cloth 

Appendix 

D1 water 

IEC Soft 

water 

% 

Change 

Appendix 

D1 

water 

IEC Soft 

water 

% 

Change 

Vented Electric Standard ......................... 1 0.50 1.15 130.0 2.26 2.65 17.3 

3 1.46 2.03 39.0 0.62 3.94 535.5 

4 1.14 0.04 ¥96.5 6.44 1.13 ¥82.5 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 169 

TABLE III.15—AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS—WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION—CEF TEST-TO-TEST

VARIATION—Continued 

Product class Test unit 

CEF Test-to-test variation standard error (%) 

DOE Test cloth IEC/AHAM Test cloth 

Appendix 

D1 water 

IEC Soft 

water 

% 

Change 

Appendix 

D1 

water 

IEC Soft 

water 

% 

Change 

6 0.72 3.93 445.8 3.68 4.81 30.7 

7 2.20 No Repeat 

Tests 

.................... 1.59 No Repeat 

Tests 

....................

8 0.16 2.49 1456.3 1.73 0.20 ¥88.4 

Avg 1.03 1.93 87.4 2.72 2.55 ¥6.3 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ............. 9 4.25 0.04 ¥99.1 2.42 2.23 ¥7.9 

10 5.70 1.05 ¥81.6 4.39 4.62 5.2 

Avg 4.98 0.54 ¥89.2 3.40 3.43 0.9 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ............. 11 2.12 1.60 ¥24.5 2.25 0.79 ¥64.9 

Vented Gas .............................................. 13 0.81 4.42 445.7 1.95 3.91 100.5 

14 1.58 0.54 ¥65.8 0.92 4.83 425.0 

15 2.08 2.68 28.8 1.73 1.26 ¥27.2 

16 0.68 Not Tested .................... 1.91 1.12 ¥41.4 

17 2.73 0.67 ¥75.5 1.94 0.60 ¥69.1 

Avg 1.57 2.08 32.5 1.69 2.34 38.5 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.00 2.56 28.0 1.50 1.71 14.0 

Ventless Electric Combination Washer/ 

Dryer ..................................................... 20 3.22 3.27 1.6 1.58 0.81 ¥48.7 

Total Average ................................... .................... 1.96 1.89 ¥3.6 2.31 2.31 0.0 

DOE determined that the 

modifications to the water supply 

specified in IEC Standard 61121 did not 

have a definitive effect on the measured 

CEF as compared to the water 

requirements specified in the existing 

DOE test procedure. In addition, the 

repeatability testing showed that the IEC 

water hardness specifications did not 

improve overall the test-to-test 

repeatability. 

DOE conducted additional testing on 

two clothes dryers to evaluate the labto-lab reproducibility using both supply 

water specifications in automatic cycle 

termination tests with the IEC/AHAM 

test load. The results, presented in Table 

III.16, showed that the IEC supply water 

may produce more reproducible results 

from lab to lab with the IEC/AHAM test 

load. DOE notes, however, that the 

percentage difference in test results 

from lab to lab is within the test-to-test 

variation for a given lab using the IEC/ 

AHAM test load (presented in Table 

III.15). For these reasons, DOE is not 

proposing amendments in today’s NOPR 

to include in the amendments to 

appendix D1 the supply water 

specifications from IEC Standard 61121. 

If additional test results are made 

available showing that IEC supply water 

characteristics produce more repeatable 

and reproducible test results than the 

requirements in appendix D1, DOE may 

consider such amendments in a future 

test procedure rulemaking. 

TABLE III.16—LAB-TO-LAB REPRODUCIBILITY OF AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TESTS WITH IEC/AHAM TEST LOAD— 

WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION

Product class Test unit 

Automatic cycle termination, Appendix D1 

water—IEC/AHAM test cloth—average 

CEF 

Automatic cycle termination, IEC soft 

water—IEC/AHAM test cloth—average 

CEF 

DOE 

lab 

Independent 

lab 

% 

Difference 

DOE 

lab 

Independent 

lab 

% 

Difference 

Vented Gas .............................................. 17 3.03 2.89 4.5 2.96 2.85 3.6 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ........... 18 2.74 2.63 4.2 2.76 2.81 1.9 

5. Proposed Amendments 

Based on the testing and analysis 

discussed above, DOE is proposing 

amendments to the clothes dryer test 

procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D1 in today’s NOPR to 

more accurately measure the energy 

consumption of automatic termination 

control clothes dryers. The proposed 

amendments are discussed in detail in 

the following sections. 

Definitions 

DOE is proposing in today’s NOPR to 

amend the clothes dryer test procedure 

to add definitions for both automatic 

termination control dryers and timer 

dryers. DOE is proposing to define 

‘‘automatic termination control dryer’’ 

as a clothes dryer that can be preset to 

carry out at least one sequence of 

operations to be terminated by means of 

a system assessing, directly or 

indirectly, the moisture content of the 

load. An automatic termination control 

dryer with a supplementary timer or 

that may also be manually controlled 

shall be tested as an automatic 

termination control dryer. DOE is 

proposing to define ‘‘timer dryer’’ as a 

clothes dryer that can be preset to carry 

out at least one operation to be 

terminated by a timer, but may also be 

manually controlled, and does not 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
170 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

include any automatic termination 

function. 

Test Load 

The current DOE test procedure in 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1, 

section 2.7 requires that test loads be 

prepared with a starting RMC of 57.5 

percent ± 3.5 percent. DOE is proposing 

amendments in today’s NOPR to change 

the starting RMC from 57.5 percent ± 3.5 

percent to 57.5 percent ± 0.33 percent. 

DOE believes that the starting RMC of 

57.5 percent ± 0.33 percent, which was 

used for the testing presented above and 

originally proposed in the June TP 2010 

SNOPR, would produce the most 

repeatable results, particularly for 

automatic cycle termination dryers. 

DOE notes that allowing a wide range in 

the starting RMC, such as the ± 3.5 

percent specified in the current DOE 

test procedure, would result in 

significantly different results using the 

proposed automatic cycle termination 

test procedure because a test load with 

a starting RMC of 61 percent would 

contain approximately 0.6 lbs. of water 

more than a test load with a starting 

RMC of 54 percent for standard size 

loads. 

As a result, DOE is specifically 

proposing to amend 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1, section 2.7.1, 

‘‘Compact size dryer load,’’ and section 

2.7.2, ‘‘Standard size dryer load,’’ to 

require that water be extracted from the 

wet test loads by spinning the load until 

the moisture content of the load is 52.5– 

57.5 percent of the bone-dry weight of 

the test load. Final mass adjustments 

would be made, such that the moisture 

content is 57.5 percent ± 0.33 percent by 

adding water uniformly to the load in a 

very fine spray. DOE notes that 

requiring water to be extracted to 

achieve an RMC between 52.5 percent 

and 57.5 percent would serve as an 

initial preparation step prior to the final 

mass adjustments to obtain a test load 

with an RMC of 57.5 ± 0.33 percent 

proposed above. 

Test Cycle 

DOE is proposing in today’s NOPR to 

change the clothes dryer test cycle 

specified in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix D1, section 3.3 to require 

separate test methods for automatic 

cycle termination dryers and timer 

dryers. 

For automatic cycle termination 

dryers, DOE is proposing to amend the 

clothes dryer test procedure to require 

the use of the control settings, presented 

in section III.B.2 of this notice, that were 

used for DOE testing. Specifically, DOE 

is proposing to require that the 

‘‘normal’’ automatic termination cycle 

program be selected for the test cycle, 

and that for dryers that do not have a 

‘‘normal’’ program, the cycle 

recommended by the manufacturer for 

drying cotton or linen clothes would be 

selected. Where the drying temperature 

can be chosen independently of the 

program, it would be set to the 

maximum temperature setting. In 

addition, the proposed amendments 

would require that where the dryness 

level setting can be chosen 

independently of the program, the 

dryness level would be set to the 

‘‘normal’’ or ‘‘medium’’ setting. If such 

designation is not provided, then the 

dryness level would be set at the midpoint between the minimum and 

maximum settings. The proposed 

amendments would also require that the 

cycle settings used for the test cycle be 

recorded. 

For the reasons explained below, the 

clothes dryer would then be allowed to 

run until the completion of the cycle, 

including any cool-down period. After 

the cycle is complete, the test load 

would be weighed to determine the final 

RMC. If the final RMC is below 2 

percent, the test would be considered 

valid. If the RMC is higher than 2 

percent, the test would be considered 

invalid and would be re-run using the 

highest dryness level setting. DOE is 

also proposing in today’s NOPR that the 

measured test cycle energy consumption 

be multiplied by a field use factor of 

0.80 to calculate the per-cycle energy 

consumption for automatic cycle 

termination clothes dryers. 

DOE is proposing in today’s NOPR to 

measure the full automatic termination 

cycle, including any cool-down period, 

to be more representative of actual 

consumer use. DOE has determined that 

the proposed provision to include a 

cool-down period would result in less 

testing burden than the January 2011 TP 

Final Rule proposal to stop the test 

cycle when the heater switches off for 

the final time immediately before the 

cool-down period begins (76 FR 972, 

998 (Jan. 6, 2011)), which would require 

the tester to monitor the dryer and 

possibly run multiple test cycles to 

determine when the heater has switched 

off for the final time. 

As discussed above, DOE also 

proposes to base the calculations for 

automatic termination control dryers on 

a nominal final RMC of 2 percent. This 

is a change from the existing test 

procedure, which requires that the 

clothes dryer test cycle be stopped when 

the final RMC is between 2.5 percent 

and 5 percent. Based on the data 

submitted in the Joint Petition and 

DOE’s analysis, DOE tentatively 

concludes that a final RMC of 2 percent 

using the DOE test load would be more 

representative of clothes dryers 

currently on the market and 

representative of the maximum 

consumer-accepted final RMC. 

DOE is proposing in today’s NOPR to 

revise the field use factor in the percycle energy consumption calculation 

for dryers with automatic termination 

controls to 0.80 based on the data 

presented above in section III.B.3. DOE 

notes that this field use factor would 

account for the measured energy 

consumption at the end of the automatic 

termination cycle drying the DOE test 

load below 2-percent RMC, which DOE 

determines to be representative of 

consumer-acceptable drying levels with 

loads of varying weights, composition, 

and size. 

As discussed in section III.B.2 of this 

notice, NEEA supplied DOE with data 

from its residential laundry field use 

study, which included 50 households in 

the northwest United States metered 

from January 2012 to March 2012. 

Although the NEEA field study did not 

provide data to closely determine the 

final RMC of laundry loads, the study 

did provide data on the weights of the 

laundry loads both before and after the 

drying cycle. As a result, DOE was able 

to determine the amount of moisture 

removed from the laundry load during 

each dry cycle, to compare with the 

proposed DOE test procedure. The 

NEEA field study showed that the 

average initial weight of the laundry 

load prior to the drying cycle for the 

average household surveyed was 

approximately 12.1 lbs, and that, on 

average, 4.8 lbs of water was removed 

during the drying cycle. Comparing this 

to the proposed DOE test procedure for 

a standard-size test load with a bone-dry 

weight of 8.45 lbs, the starting RMC of 

57.5 percent would result in an initial 

weight of the test load of approximately 

13.3 lbs. The proposed test procedure, 

which requires that the laundry load be 

dried to below 2-percent RMC, would 

require approximately 4.7 lbs of water to 

be removed from the load during the 

drying cycle. Based on the information 

from the NEEA field use study, DOE 

concludes that the weight of the test 

load and amount of moisture removed 

during the drying cycle in the proposed 

test procedure are fairly representative 

of consumer use. 

Data from the NEEA study also 

showed that the average household 

surveyed used the ‘‘normal’’ or an 

equivalent program cycle setting for 

nearly 60 percent of all drying cycles. 

The remaining drying cycles used other 

automatic termination cycle settings, or 

timed dry or manual cycles. Based on 

these usage patterns, DOE tentatively 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 171 

concludes that using the ‘‘normal’’ 

automatic termination program cycle 

setting for automatic termination control 

clothes dryers would be most 

representative of consumer use. DOE is 

not proposing to require additional 

program cycle settings, which would 

also require specifying different load 

types for each setting, in today’s NOPR 

to minimize testing burden. 

For timer dryers, DOE is proposing to 

use the test method currently specified 

in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix 

D1, section 3.3 with a revised final RMC 

requirement. The proposed test method 

would require that the clothes dryer be 

operated using the highest temperature 

setting and maximum time setting. The 

clothes dryer would then be allowed to 

run until the final RMC of the load is 

between 1.0 percent and 2.5 percent, at 

which point the test cycle is stopped 

without permitting the clothes dryer to 

advance into the cool-down period. 

After stopping the test run, test 

technicians would remove and weigh 

the test load. DOE is also proposing to 

add a clarification that the clothes dryer 

should not be stopped intermittently in 

the middle of the test cycle for any 

reason. This clarification would ensure 

that test technicians are not stopping the 

dryer intermittently to weigh the test 

load to check whether it is within the 

target range for the final RMC. Such a 

practice would alter the measured 

results because of the heat loss from the 

dryer when the cycle is stopped. 

DOE is proposing in today’s NOPR to 

include separate calculations for the 

per-cycle energy consumption for timer 

dryers. The calculations would be 

similar to the calculations provided in 

the current DOE test procedure in 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1, 

sections 4.1–4.3, except that the 

normalization of the per-cycle energy 

consumption to represent the energy 

consumption required to dry the test 

load to 4-percent RMC would be 

changed to represent the new target 

RMC of 2 percent. The per-cycle energy 

consumption calculation in the current 

test procedure applies a scaling factor of 

53.5 to be representative of the 

percentage change from the nominal 

initial RMC of 57.5 percent to the 

nominal ending RMC of 4 percent. The 

proposed amendments would change 

this scaling factor to 55.5 to reflect the 

new ending RMC of 2 percent. DOE 

proposes a range of 1.0 percent to 2.5 

percent for the allowable ending RMC 

during the test cycle to reduce testing 

burden. DOE tentatively concludes that 

requiring the tester to dry the test load 

to an exact RMC during the test cycle 

would be unduly burdensome because it 

could require the test to be repeated a 

significant number of times until the 

exact RMC is achieved. For the test 

procedure to produce repeatable results, 

the measured test cycle energy 

consumption is normalized to calculate 

the energy consumption required to dry 

the test load from exactly 57.5-percent 

RMC to 2-percent RMC, which is 

representative of clothes dryers 

currently on the market and of the 

maximum consumer-accepted final 

RMC. 

DOE proposes in today’s NOPR that 

manufacturers continue to apply the 

field use factor needed to account for 

the energy consumption of drying 

beyond the 2-percent RMC specified in 

the test procedure. DOE is not proposing 

any changes to the 1.18 field use factor 

for timer dryers because DOE is not 

aware of any data or studies more recent 

than the studies on which it was 

originally based that would indicate that 

this value is not currently representative 

of consumer use. DOE seeks comment 

on the field use factors for both 

automatic termination control dryers 

and timer dryers in section V.E of this 

notice. 

DOE is not proposing to include the 

cool-down period as part of the timed 

dry test cycle because the proposed test 

method requires drying the load to a 

specified RMC, at which point the test 

cycle is stopped by the test technician. 

DOE has determined that specifying a 

timed dry cycle that includes the cooldown period to achieve a target final 

RMC would add significant testing 

burden on test technicians to determine 

and preset the appropriate time setting. 

It would also be difficult to ensure that 

testing results are repeatable and 

reproducible because different 

combinations of timed dry cycle length 

and cool-down period may be selected 

to dry a test load to the same final RMC. 

For these reasons, DOE is not amending 

the timed dry test cycle to include the 

cool-down period in today’s NOPR. 

C. Incorporating by Reference IEC 

Standard 62301 Second Edition for 

Measuring Standby Mode and Off Mode 

Power 

The January 2011 TP Final Rule 

incorporated in the test procedures for 

clothes dryers relevant provisions from 

IEC Standard 62301 (First Edition) for 

measuring standby mode and off mode 

power. 76 FR 972, 979–80 (Jan. 6, 2011). 

DOE reviewed the IEC Standard 62301 

(First Edition) and concluded that it 

would be generally applicable to clothes 

dryers, although some clarification 

would be needed. Specifically, DOE 

adopted amendments for standby mode 

and off mode power measurements to 

provide a stabilization period of 30 to 40 

minutes followed by an energy use 

measurement period of 10 minutes. 76 

FR 986 (Jan.6, 2011). With these 

clarifications in place, the January 2011 

TP Final Rule referenced IEC Standard 

62301 (First Edition) for the standby 

mode and off mode wattage 

measurements. DOE also incorporated 

into the clothes dryer test procedure 

definitions of ‘‘active mode,’’ ‘‘standby 

mode,’’ and ‘‘off mode’’ based on the 

definitions provided in IEC Standard 

62301 CDV. 76 FR 76 FR 981–85 (Jan. 

6, 2011). 

IEC Standard 62301 (Second Edition) 

published on January 27, 2011. 

Consistent with EPCA requirements for 

amending test procedures to include 

standby and off mode procedures, DOE 

considered IEC Standard 62301 (Second 

Edition) in today’s NOPR for 

amendments to the standby mode and 

off mode test procedures for clothes 

dryers. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) is an 

internationally-accepted test procedure 

for measuring standby power in 

residential appliances, and it provides 

clarification to certain sections as 

compared to the First Edition, as 

discussed in the following paragraphs. 

Section 4, paragraph 4.4 of the Second 

Edition revises the power measurement 

accuracy provisions of the First Edition. 

A more comprehensive specification of 

required accuracy is provided in the 

Second Edition, which depends upon 

the characteristics of the power being 

measured. Testers using the Second 

Edition are required to measure the crest 

factor and power factor of the input 

power, and to calculate a maximum 

current ratio (MCR) (paragraph 4.4.1 of 

the Second Edition). The Second 

Edition then specifies calculations to 

determine permitted uncertainty in 

MCR. DOE notes, however, that the 

allowable uncertainty is the same or less 

stringent than the allowable uncertainty 

specified in the First Edition, depending 

on the value of MCR and the power 

level being measured (see Table III.17 

for examples). This change in the 

allowable uncertainty, however, 

maintains sufficient accuracy of 

measurements under a full range of 

possible measured power levels without 

placing undue demands on the 

instrumentation. These power 

measurement accuracy requirements 

were based upon detailed technical 

submissions to the IEC in the 

development of IEC Standard 62301 

Final Draft International Standard 

(FDIS), which showed that commonlyused power measurement instruments 

were unable to meet the original 

requirements for certain types of loads. 

The incremental testing burden 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
172 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

associated with the additional 

measurements and calculations is offset 

by the more reasonable requirements for 

testing equipment, while maintaining 

measurement accuracy deemed 

acceptable and practical by voting 

members for IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition). For these reasons, 

DOE proposes in today’s notice to 

incorporate by reference in 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D1, section 

2.4.7 the power equipment 

specifications in section 4, paragraph 

4.4 of IEC Standard 62301 (Second 

Edition). 

TABLE III.17—COMPARISON OF ALLOWABLE UNCERTAINTY IN MEASURED POWER

Measured Power (W) 

Allowable Uncertainty (W) 

IEC 62301 

(First Edition) 

IEC 62301 (Second Edition) 

MCR = 5 MCR = 15 

5.0 0.1 0.1 0.14

2.0 0.04 0.04 0.056 

1.0 0.02 0.02 0.028 

0.5 0.01 0.02 0.02

0.2 0.01 0.02 0.02

Section 5, paragraph 5.2 of IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) 

maintains the installation and setup 

procedures incorporated by reference in 

the clothes dryer test procedure in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule from the 

First Edition. These provisions require 

that the appliance be prepared and set 

up in accordance with manufacturer’s 

instructions, and that if no instructions 

are given, then the factory or ‘‘default’’ 

settings shall be used, or where there are 

no indications for such settings, the 

appliance is tested as supplied. 

Additionally, IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) adds certain 

clarifications to the installation and 

setup procedures in section 5, paragraph 

5.2 of the First Edition regarding 

products equipped with a battery 

recharging circuit for an internal battery, 

as well as instructions for testing each 

relevant configuration option identified 

in the product’s instructions for use. 

DOE is not aware of any clothes dryer 

with an internal battery, or with a 

recharging circuit for such a battery. 

DOE also believes that a requirement to 

separately test each configuration option 

could substantially increase test burden 

and potentially conflicts with the 

requirement within the same section to 

set up the product in accordance with 

the instructions for use or, if no such 

instructions are available, to use the 

factory or ‘‘default’’ settings. Therefore, 

DOE tentatively concludes that the 

portions of the installation instructions 

in section 5, paragraph 5.2 of IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) 

pertaining to batteries and the 

requirement for the determination, 

classification, and testing of all modes 

associated with every combination of 

available product configuration options 

(which may be more numerous than the 

modes associated with operation at the 

default settings) are not appropriate for 

the clothes dryer test procedures. 

Accordingly, DOE is proposing 

qualifying language in the test 

procedure amendments in 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D1, section 2.1 

to disregard those portions of the 

installation instructions. 

The Second Edition also contains 

provisions for the power supply (section 

4.3) and power-measuring instruments 

(section 4.4). Paragraph 4.3.2 requires 

that the value of the harmonic content 

of the voltage supply be recorded during 

the test and reported. As described 

previously, paragraph 4.4.1 requires the 

instrument to measure the crest factor 

and maximum current ratio. Paragraph 

4.4.3 requires the instrument to be 

capable of measuring the average power 

or integrated total energy consumption 

over any operator-selected time interval. 

DOE is aware of commercially available 

power measurement instruments that 

can perform each of these required 

measurements individually. However, 

DOE is also aware that certain industrystandard instruments, such as the 

Yokogawa WT210/WT230 digital power 

meter and possibly others, are unable to 

measure harmonic content or crest 

factor while measuring average power or 

total integrated energy consumption. 

DOE is concerned that laboratories 

currently using power-measuring 

instruments without this capability 

would be required to purchase, at 

potentially significant expense, 

additional power-measuring 

instruments that are able to perform all 

these measurements simultaneously. 

Therefore, DOE proposes in 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D1, sections 

2.3.1.1 and 2.4.7 that if the powermeasuring instrument is unable to 

perform these measurements during the 

actual test measurement, it would be 

acceptable to measure the total 

harmonic content, crest factor, and 

maximum current ratio immediately 

before and immediately after the actual 

test measurement to determine whether 

the requirements for the power supply 

and power measurement have been met. 

The other major changes in the 

Second Edition related to the 

measurement of standby mode and off 

mode power consumption in covered 

products involve measurement 

techniques and specification of the 

stability criteria required to measure 

that power. The Second Edition 

contains more detailed techniques to 

evaluate the stability of the power 

consumption and to measure the power 

consumption for loads with different 

stability characteristics. According to 

the Second Edition, the user is given a 

choice of measurement procedures, 

including sampling methods, average 

reading methods, and a direct meter 

reading method. DOE evaluated these 

new methods in terms of test burden 

and improvement in results as 

compared to the methods adopted in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule, which were 

based on IEC Standard 62301 (First 

Edition). 

In the January 2011 TP Final Rule, 

DOE adopted provisions requiring that 

clothes dryer standby mode and off 

mode power be measured using section 

5, paragraph 5.3 of IEC Standard 62301 

(First Edition), clarified by requiring the 

product to stabilize for 30 to 40 minutes 

and using an energy use measurement 

period of 10 minutes. Further, for any 

clothes dryer in which the power varies 

over a cycle, as described in section 5, 

paragraph 5.3.2 of the First Edition, the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule adopted 

amendments to require the use of the 

average power approach in section 5, 

paragraph 5.3.2(a), with a 30- to 40- 

minute stabilization period and a 10- 

minute minimum measurement period, 

as long as the measurement period 

comprises one or more complete cycles. 

76 FR 972, 979–980, 985–986 (Jan. 6, 

2011). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 173 

For today’s notice, to determine the 

potential impacts of referencing 

methodology from IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) rather than from the 

First Edition, DOE compared the 

provisions allowed by each under 

different scenarios of power 

consumption stability, as discussed in 

the following sections. 

1. Stable Power Consumption 

According to section 5, paragraph 

5.3.1 of IEC Standard 62301 (First 

Edition), after an initial stabilization 

period of 5 minutes, power 

consumption is defined as stable if it 

varies by less than 5 percent over a 

subsequent measurement period of 5 

minutes. In such a case, a direct reading 

may be made at the end of the 

measurement period. With the 

clarifications adopted in the January 

2011 TP Final Rule, the total test time 

would be 40 to 50 minutes (comprised 

of a 30- to 40-minute stabilization 

period, followed by a 10-minute period 

during which the stability criterion 

could be evaluated and a direct power 

reading taken.) Alternatively, the tester 

may select an average power or 

accumulated energy approach, again 

with a 30- to 40-minute stabilization 

period and a 10-minute measurement 

period. The average power approach 

would simply require a different reading 

to be taken from the instrument (true 

average power instead of a direct 

reading of instantaneous power), while 

the accumulated energy approach 

would require the calculation of power 

by dividing an accumulated energy by 

the duration of the measurement period. 

In comparison, section 5, paragraph 

5.3.4 of IEC Standard 62301 (Second 

Edition) specifies a direct meter reading 

method that can be used for stable 

power consumption, in which a 

minimum 30-minute stabilization 

period must be observed, followed by a 

first power measurement. After an 

additional period of 10 minutes, a 

second power measurement is taken. If 

the average of the two measurements 

divided by the time interval between 

them meets certain threshold criteria, 

then the power consumption is 

considered to be the average of the two 

power measurements. Thus, the total 

test period would still be at minimum 

40 minutes. DOE believes that this 

method likely improves the validity of 

the test results, as it is a more stringent 

measure of the stability of the power 

consumption over a longer period of 

time than the First Edition requires. 

However, if the threshold criteria are 

not met at the end of the test, a different 

measurement method must be used, 

increasing test time and complexity. 

Further, the Second Edition specifies 

that the direct reading method shall not 

be used for verification purposes. Both 

of these qualifications potentially 

increase test burden as compared to the 

First Edition, possibly requiring the 

tester to conduct the more complex 

methodology of the methods available 

under the Second Edition. 

Section 5, paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) 

identifies a sampling method as the 

preferred means for all power 

consumption measurements and the 

fastest test method when the power is 

stable. For any non-cyclic power 

consumption, power readings are 

initially recorded over a period of at 

least 15 minutes after energizing the 

product. Data from the first third of the 

measurement period are discarded, and 

stability is evaluated by a linear 

regression through all power readings in 

the second two-thirds of the data. If the 

slope of the linear regression is less than 

10 milliwatts per hour (mW/h) for input 

power less than or equal to 1.0 W, or 

less than 1 percent of the input power 

per hour for input power greater than 

1.0 W, the power consumption is 

calculated as the average of the power 

readings during the second two-thirds of 

the measurement period. If the slope of 

the linear regression does not meet these 

stability criteria, the total period is 

continuously extended until the 

stability criteria are met for the second 

two-thirds of the data. In some cases, 

this is a more stringent requirement 

than the stability criteria of IEC 

Standard 62301 (First Edition). The lack 

of a definitive test period means that the 

test duration could extend past 15 

minutes for certain products—up to 3 

hours is allowed in the Second 

Edition—and could introduce added 

test burden as compared to the First 

Edition. 

2. Unstable, Non-Cyclic Power 

Consumption 

Section 5, paragraph 5.3 from IEC 

Standard 62301 (First Edition), which 

DOE incorporated by reference in the 

clothes dryer test procedure in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule with 

clarification, specifies that either an 

average power method or accumulated 

energy approach could be used for 

measuring non-cyclic unstable power 

consumption. As described previously, 

this methodology, as adopted in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule, would limit 

total test duration to 40–50 minutes. 

In contrast, the Second Edition 

requires the use of either a sampling 

method or average reading method for 

measuring power consumption in 

standby mode or off mode. The 

sampling method is the same as 

described previously, but the 

measurement period must be at least 60 

minutes, and the cumulative average of 

all data points recorded during the 

second two-thirds of the total period 

must fall within a band of ±0.2 percent. 

The average reading method in 

section 5, paragraph 5.3.3 IEC Standard 

62301 (Second Edition) comprises both 

an average power method and 

accumulated energy method, either of 

which may be selected for unstable, 

non-cyclic power. For both methods, a 

30-minute stabilization period is 

specified, followed by two comparison 

measurement periods of not less than 10 

minutes each. The average power 

values, either measured directly or 

calculated from accumulated energy 

during each period, are compared to 

determine whether they agree to within 

certain threshold criteria. If the 

threshold is not achieved, the 

comparison periods are each extended 

in approximately equal increments until 

the threshold is met. If agreement is not 

achieved after reaching 30 minutes for 

each comparison period, the sampling 

method must then be used. Therefore, 

the minimum test period is 50 minutes, 

but may extend up to 90 minutes, at 

which time an additional test may be 

required. 

DOE believes that the stability criteria 

in either method improves the accuracy 

and representativeness of the 

measurement as compared to the First 

Edition, but would cause the required 

test time to increase, with a 

corresponding increase in manufacturer 

burden due to the additional time and 

complexity of the test. 

3. Cyclic Power Consumption 

As noted previously, DOE adopted 

amendments in the January 2011 TP 

Final Rule to require that for any clothes 

dryer in which the power varies over a 

cycle, the average power approach of 

section 5, paragraph 5.3.2(a) in IEC 

Standard 62301 (First Edition) shall be 

used, with a 30- to 40-minute 

stabilization period and minimum 10- 

minute measurement period. The First 

Edition also requires that at least one or 

more complete cycles be measured. 

In the Second Edition, cyclic power 

must be measured according to the 

sampling method in section 5, 

paragraph 5.3.2, but this method 

requires a measurement period of at 

least four complete cycles (for a total of 

at least 40 minutes) divided into two 

comparison periods, with stability 

criteria evaluated by calculating the 

difference in average power measured in 

each comparison period divided by the 

time difference of the mid-point of each 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
174 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

comparison period. Similar to the 

sampling method for stable power 

consumption measurements described 

previously, this ‘‘slope’’ must be less 

than 10 mW/h for input powers less 

than or equal to 1 W, and less than 1 

percent of the input power per hour for 

input powers greater than 1 W. If the 

appropriate stability criterion is not met, 

additional cycles are added to each 

comparison period until the criterion is 

achieved. Once stability has been 

reached, the power consumption is 

calculated as the average of all readings 

from both comparison periods. DOE 

believes that this methodology produces 

an improved measurement over the 

methodology from the First Edition, but 

the test duration could be extended, 

again potentially introducing issues of 

increased test burden. 

4. Conclusions on Test Methodology 

DOE, in evaluating IEC Standard 

62301 (Second Edition) in comparison 

to the First Edition, considers the 

substantial body of comments on and 

input to the provisions and 

methodology that IEC developed as part 

of its latest revision process. DOE 

recognizes that, in some cases, test 

burden and complexity would be 

increased by requiring the use of the test 

methods specified in the Second 

Edition. AHAM and manufacturers 

involved in the IEC review process have 

commented that IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) test methods improve 

the accuracy and representativeness of 

the test measurements and would not be 

unduly burdensome to conduct. 77 FR 

28805, 28812 (May 16, 2012); 76 FR 

58346, 58350 (Sept. 20, 2011); 77 FR 

13888, 13893 (March 7, 2012). As a 

result, and for the reasons discussed 

above, DOE proposes incorporation by 

reference of the relevant paragraphs of 

section 5.3 of IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) in the clothes dryer 

test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1, section 3.6. 

Further, DOE observes that although 

the Second Edition allows the choice of 

multiple test methods for both stable 

and unstable non-cyclic power 

consumption, the sampling method 

provides for a test duration that is 

approximately the same or similar to the 

allowable alternative methods and does 

not require classification of the nature of 

the power consumption (e.g., stable or 

unstable, non-cyclic) in advance of the 

test. By monitoring the variation in 

power consumption during the test, the 

test operator could determine whether it 

is stable or unstable, and thereby 

establish the required duration of the 

sampling periods. For cyclic power 

consumption, the Second Edition also 

requires the use of the sampling 

method. Thus, DOE proposes to require 

in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix 

D1, section 3.6 the use of the sampling 

method in section 5.3.2 of the Second 

Edition for all standby mode and off 

mode power measurements. 

DOE is also proposing to amend the 

reference in 10 CFR 430.3 to add IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition). DOE 

is not proposing to replace the reference 

to the First Edition in 10 CFR 430.3, 

because several test procedures for other 

covered products not addressed in 

today’s notice incorporate provisions 

from it. In addition, there are a number 

of editorial changes necessary in 

appendix D1 to allow for the correct 

referencing to the Second Edition. For 

example, the definition sections need to 

define the IEC Standard 62301 as the 

Second Edition instead of the First 

Edition. Also, there are some section 

numbering differences in the Second 

Edition that impact the text of the 

measurement provisions of the relevant 

test procedures. 

D. Technical Correction to the 

Calculation of the Per-Cycle Combined 

Total Energy Consumption 

DOE notes that 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1, section 4.6, 

regarding the calculation of the percycle combined total energy 

consumption contains a reference to an 

incorrect section number. The per-cycle 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption, ETSO, which is contained 

in section 4.5, is incorrectly referenced 

in the per-cycle combined total energy 

consumption as section 4.7. DOE is 

proposing in today’s NOPR to correct 

this section number reference. 

E. Clarifications to Test Conditions 

DOE notes that it received a number 

of inquiries from independent test 

laboratories requesting clarification on 

testing according to the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D. DOE is 

proposing amendments in today’s NOPR 

to clarify the cycle settings used for the 

test cycle and the requirements for the 

gas supply for gas clothes dryers. 

Section 3.3 in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D specifies that the 

maximum temperature setting and, if a 

tested unit is equipped with a timer, the 

maximum time setting must be used for 

the drying test cycle. DOE received an 

inquiry from an independent test 

laboratory regarding how to test a 

clothes dryer that has timed dry cycle 

length settings, but no temperature 

settings on the control panel. DOE is 

proposing to clarify in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D, section 3.3, that 

if the clothes dryer does not have a 

separate temperature setting selection 

on the control panel, the maximum time 

setting should be used for the drying 

test cycle. In today’s NOPR, DOE is 

proposing to amend 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1, to require 

separate test methods for timer dryers 

and automatic termination control 

dryers. Because the proposed timed dry 

test method maintains the same cycle 

settings as specified in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D, DOE is also 

proposing to include the clarification 

discussed above in section 3.3.1 in 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1, 

for the timer dryer test method. Because 

the proposed test method for automatic 

termination control dryers requires 

using an automatic cycle termination 

program where the drying temperature 

and dryness level settings are modified 

only if they can be chosen 

independently of the cycle program, 

DOE is not proposing to include the 

clarification discussed above. 

DOE also received an inquiry 

regarding how to test a clothes dryer 

that has an optional cycle setting, other 

than the temperature and time settings, 

that is activated by default in the 

condition as shipped by the 

manufacturer. DOE is proposing to 

clarify in both 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D, section 3.3, and 

appendix D1, section 3.3.1, that the test 

procedures specify requirements only 

for the temperature setting and time 

setting, and do not specify 

modifications to any other optional 

settings that do not affect the 

temperature setting and time setting. 

Similarly in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix D1, section 3.3.2, DOE is 

proposing to clarify for automatic 

termination control dryers, the test 

procedures specify requirements only 

for the automatic termination cycle 

program, temperature setting, and 

dryness setting, and do not specify 

modifications to any other optional 

settings that do not affect the automatic 

termination cycle program, temperature 

setting, and dryness setting. 

Section 2.3.2 in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D and appendix 

D1, specifies that gas supply to the 

clothes dryer should be maintained at a 

normal inlet test pressure at 7 to 10 

inches of water column, and that the 

hourly British thermal unit (Btu) rating 

of the burner shall be maintained within 

±5 percent of the rating specified by the 

manufacturer. DOE received an inquiry 

from an independent testing laboratory 

noting that during its testing, the gas 

dryer under test did not meet the 

requirement to maintain the Btu rating 

within 5 percent of the rating specified 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 175 

by the manufacturer under the 

allowable range in gas inlet test 

pressure. DOE is proposing to add a 

clarification in both 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D and appendix D1 

that if the requirement to maintain the 

hourly Btu rating of the burner within 

±5 percent of the rating specified by the 

manufacturer cannot be achieved under 

the allowable range in gas inlet test 

pressure, the orifice of the gas burner 

should be modified as necessary to 

achieve the required Btu rating. 

Section 2.3.2 in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D and appendix 

D1, also specifies that if a clothes dryer 

is equipped with a gas appliance 

pressure regulator, the regulator outlet 

pressure at the normal test pressure 

shall be approximately that 

recommended by the manufacturer. 

DOE notes that the test procedures for 

similar gas heating products, such as gas 

water heaters, specifies that the 

regulator outlet pressure must be within 

±10 percent of the value specified by the 

manufacturer. DOE is proposing to 

clarify the term ‘‘approximately’’ by 

specifying that the regulator outlet 

pressure shall be within ±10 percent of 

the value specified by the manufacturer. 

F. Effects of Proposed Test Procedure 

Revisions on Compliance With 

Standards 

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)(1)) If DOE determines that the 

amended test procedure would alter the 

measured efficiency of a covered 

product, DOE must amend the 

applicable energy conservation standard 

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

determining the amended energy 

conservation standard, the Secretary 

shall measure, pursuant to the amended 

test procedure, the energy efficiency, 

energy use, or water use of a 

representative sample of covered 

products that minimally comply with 

the existing standard. The average of 

such energy efficiency, energy use, or 

water use levels determined under the 

amended test procedure shall constitute 

the amended energy conservation 

standard for the applicable covered 

products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) Models 

of covered products in use before the 

date on which the amended energy 

conservation standard becomes effective 

(or revisions of such models that come 

into use after such date and have the 

same energy efficiency, energy use or 

water use characteristics) that comply 

with the energy conservation standard 

applicable to such covered products on 

the day before such date shall be 

deemed to comply with the energy 

conservation standard. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(e)(3)) DOE’s authority to amend 

energy conservation standards does not 

affect DOE’s obligation to issue any final 

standards as described in 42 U.S.C. 

6295. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(4)) 

1. Active Mode 

As discussed in section III.E, DOE is 

only proposing to amend 10 CFR part 

430 subpart B, appendix D in today’s 

NOPR to clarify the cycle settings used 

for testing and the requirements for the 

gas supply. Because the proposed 

amendments to appendix D would not 

change the actual testing method, DOE 

determined that these proposed 

amendments would not affect the 

measured efficiency according to 

appendix D and would not affect a 

manufacturer’s ability to demonstrate 

compliance with the current energy 

conservation standards at 10 CFR 

430.32(h)(2). 

Because the January 1, 2015 energy 

conservation standards for clothes 

dryers are based on CEF as measured 

according to 10 CFR part 430 subpart B, 

subpart D1, DOE investigated how the 

proposed amendments for automatic 

cycle termination would affect the 

measured CEF. 

In response to the August 2011 RFI, 

the Joint Petitioners commented that if 

DOE adopts the petition’s proposed test 

procedure amendments, it must also 

revise the relevant energy conservation 

standards to reflect the new test 

procedure, ensuring that for clothes 

dryers with effective automatic 

termination controls, there is no change 

in stringency of the standards. The Joint 

Petitioners stated that the procedures in 

42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2) should be used, 

with the clarification that for the 

purposes of establishing a representative 

sample of products, DOE should select 

a sample of minimally compliant 

clothes dryers that automatically 

terminate the drying cycle at 1.5- to 2- 

percent RMC. The Joint Petitioners 

stated that by selecting products that 

terminate at 1.5- to 2-percent RMC, DOE 

will assure that the revised standard is 

based upon dryers that do not over-dry 

and that the tested sample yields valid 

results under both the current and 

proposed revised test procedure. The 

Joint Petitioners also stated that if DOE 

does not consider dryers that terminate 

the drying cycle at 1.5- to 2-percent 

RMC to be a representative sample, the 

proposed test procedure in the Joint 

Petition should still be adopted. In that 

case, the Joint Petitioners stated that 

DOE could revise the energy 

conservation standards without limiting 

the representative sample of dryers 

based on automatic termination 

performance. However, the Joint 

Petitioners noted that this approach 

would reduce, but not eliminate, the 

benefits from this test procedure change. 

(Joint Petition, No. 2 at pp. 6–7) 

DOE conducted testing on 20 clothes 

dryers according to the current DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure in appendix 

D1 and then according to the proposed 

automatic cycle termination test 

procedure. The results of this testing, 

presented in Table III.18, showed that 

specific models resulted in either a 

lower or higher measured CEF as 

compared to the measured CEF using 

the current test procedure, ranging from 

a 27.4 percent decrease to a 20.4 percent 

increase in CEF with an average of a 3.8 

percent increase. DOE also evaluated 

the effects of the proposed amendments 

for the products in DOE’s test sample 

that minimally comply with the existing 

energy conservation standards (based on 

rated EF). The results for the 10 

minimally compliant units in DOE’s test 

sample showed a 27.4 percent decrease 

to a 16.9 percent increase in CEF as 

compared to the CEF using the test 

procedure in 10 CFR part 430 subpart B, 

subpart D1, with an average of a 4.1 

percent increase. 

TABLE III.18—EFFECTS OF PROPOSED AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST METHOD

Product class Test unit 

Current 

Appendix D1 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

Proposed automatic cycle 

termination test method 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

% Change 

from appendix 

D1 CEF 

Vented Electric Standard *1 3.58 3.94 10.2 

2 3.93 3.41 ¥13.2 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
176 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE III.18—EFFECTS OF PROPOSED AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST METHOD—Continued 

Product class Test unit 

Current 

Appendix D1 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

Proposed automatic cycle 

termination test method 

CEF (lbs/kWh) 

% Change 

from appendix 

D1 CEF 

*

3 3.83 4.35 13.6 

*

4 3.71 4.34 16.9 

5 3.90 4.37 12.0 

*

6 3.80 3.39 ¥10.9 *

7 3.84 3.83 ¥0.2 *

8 3.71 3.87 4.4 

Vented Electric Compact (240V) ..................................................................... *9 3.53 4.12 16.7 

10 3.56 2.84 ¥20.2 

Vented Electric Compact (120V) ..................................................................... *11 3.75 2.72 ¥27.4 

Vented Gas ...................................................................................................... 12 3.43 3.37 ¥1.7 *

13 3.31 3.58 8.1 

*

14 3.49 3.84 9.8 

15 3.39 3.37 ¥0.7 

16 3.37 4.05 20.4 

17 3.37 3.66 8.6 

Ventless Electric Compact (240V) ................................................................... 18 2.98 3.40 14.0 

Ventless Electric Combo Washer/Dryer .......................................................... 19 2.81 2.70 ¥3.9 

20 2.28 2.74 20.2 

Total Average ........................................................................................... 3.8 

* Minimally compliant test units. 

Based on these results and consistent 

with 42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1) and (2), DOE 

tentatively concludes that the proposed 

amendments to the active mode test 

procedure will on average not impact 

the measured efficiency as compared to 

the current test procedure for models 

currently available on the market. As a 

result, DOE is not considering 

amendments to the energy conservation 

standards that will be required on 

January 1, 2015. 

2. Standby Mode and Off Mode 

DOE also investigated how the 

proposed amendments for standby 

mode and off mode would affect the 

measured efficiency. Because the 

proposed amendments to the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure in 10 CFR 

part 430 subpart B, appendix D1 for 

measuring standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption would not alter the 

existing measure of energy consumption 

for clothes dryers (EF), the proposed 

amendments would not affect a 

manufacturer’s ability to comply with 

the current energy conservation 

standards. 

DOE’s amendments in the January 

2011 TP Final Rule specified that 

manufacturers will not be required to 

use the test procedure provisions for 

standby mode and off mode until the 

mandatory January 1, 2015 compliance 

date of the amended clothes dryer 

energy conservation standards. (10 CFR 

430.32(h)(3)) The January 1, 2015 

amended energy conservation standards 

are based on CEF, which accounts for 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption. Because today’s proposed 

amendments would revise the 

provisions used to measure standby 

mode and off mode energy 

consumption, and thus CEF, DOE 

investigated how the proposed test 

procedure amendments would affect the 

amended energy conservation standards 

at 10 CFR 430.32(h)(3). DOE believes the 

proposed changes to the testing methods 

for measuring standby mode and off 

mode energy consumption do not vary 

significantly from the methods in the 

amended DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure in appendix D1 for measuring 

standby power and would not alter the 

measured efficiency. To confirm this 

assertion, DOE conducted testing on 

four clothes dryers (three of which 

minimally comply with the existing 

energy conservation standards) 

according to both the existing appendix 

D1 and the proposed amendments to 

appendix D1 for standby mode and off 

mode that are based IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition). The results, presented 

below in Table III.19, show that the 

measured average standby power is the 

same using both methods. 

TABLE III.19—DOE TEST RESULTS TO EVALUATE EFFECTS OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO STANDBY AND OFF MODE

TESTING PROCEDURES

Test unit 

Average standby power (W) 

Existing 

appendix D1 

Proposed 

appendix D1 

1 * ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.97 0.97 

3 * ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.16 0.16 

14 * ........................................................................................................................................................................... 0.38 0.38 

16 ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.70 0.70 

* Minimally compliant test units. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 177 

Based on these test results, DOE 

believes that the proposed amendments 

to the clothes dryer test procedure for 

standby mode and off mode would not 

alter the measured CEF. DOE is, 

therefore, not considering amendments 

to the energy conservation standards at 

10 CFR 430.32(h)(3) that must be met on 

January 1, 2015. 

DOE’s proposed amendments would 

continue to clarify that manufacturers 

would not be required to use the 

provisions relating to standby mode and 

off mode energy use to determine 

compliance with the energy 

conservation standard until the 

compliance date of the amended energy 

conservation standards for clothes 

dryers addressing standby mode and off 

mode energy use on January 1, 2015. As 

a result, the proposed test procedure 

amendments for standby mode and off 

mode would not affect a manufacturer’s 

ability to demonstrate compliance with 

the current energy conservation 

standards. 

G. Compliance With Other EPCA 

Requirements 

1. Test Burden 

EPCA requires that test procedures 

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. Test 

procedures must also not be unduly 

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

6293(b)(3)) 

DOE notes that the proposed 

amendments for automatic cycle 

termination, discussed in section III.B.5, 

would change the test cycle for 

automatic cycle termination dryers to 

require that a programmed automatic 

termination cycle be used for the test 

instead of using the maximum timed 

dry setting. The proposed provision to 

include the cool down period and 

allowing the clothes dryer to run until 

the completion of the programmed dry 

cycle would likely be less burdensome 

than the existing test procedure in 

which the tester is required to monitor 

or make estimates about the RMC of the 

test load and potentially run multiple 

test cycles to determine when to stop 

the test to achieve the desired final 

RMC. For timer dryers, the proposed 

amendments would use the same basic 

test method that is currently specified in 

the DOE test procedure in 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D1, except that 

the test cycle would be stopped when 

the final RMC is between 1.0 percent 

and 2.5 percent instead of between 2.5 

percent and 5.0 percent. DOE notes that 

this would result in a slightly longer 

cycle time, but the additional time 

would be minimal compared to the 

overall time to set up and conduct the 

test. For these reasons, DOE believes 

that the amendments to more accurately 

account for automatic cycle termination 

proposed in today’s NOPR would not be 

unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE 

also notes that the revised test cycle for 

automatic cycle termination dryers 

would produce a measured energy use 

that is more representative of consumer 

use because it directly measures the 

energy consumption of the programmed 

automatic termination cycle. 

With regards to the amendments for 

standby and off mode power 

consumption, DOE concluded in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule that the 

amended test procedure would produce 

test results that measure the standby 

mode and off mode power consumption 

of covered products during a 

representative average use cycle as well 

as annual energy consumption, and that 

the test procedure would not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. 76 FR 972. 

1020 (Jan. 6, 2011). Today’s proposed 

amendments to the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure for standby mode and off 

mode are based on an updated version 

of IEC Standard 62301, IEC Standard 

62301 (Second Edition), which has been 

the subject of significant review and 

input from interested parties and, thus, 

continues to be an internationally 

accepted test standard for measuring 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption. As discussed in section 

III.0 of this notice, DOE believes that the 

provisions of IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) that it proposes to 

incorporate by reference through today’s 

NOPR provide a means to measure 

power consumption with greater 

accuracy and repeatability than the 

provisions from IEC Standard 62301 

(First Edition) that were adopted in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule. DOE 

tentatively concludes that today’s 

proposed amendments would also 

provide measurements representative of 

average consumer use of the product 

under test. DOE also notes that 

interested parties have commented that 

the testing methods in IEC Standard 

62301 (Second Edition) would not be 

unduly burdensome to conduct. 77 FR 

28805, 28812 (May 16, 2012); 76 FR 

58346, 58350 (Sept. 20, 2011); 77 FR 

13888, 13893 (March 7, 2012). The 

potential for increased test burden for 

certain power consumption 

measurements is also offset by more 

reasonable requirements for testing 

equipment, while maintaining 

measurement accuracy deemed 

acceptable and practical by voting 

members for IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition). For these reasons, 

DOE tentatively concludes that the 

amended test procedures proposed in 

today’s NOPR would produce test 

results that measure the standby mode 

and off mode power consumption 

during representative use, and that the 

test procedures would not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. 

2. Certification Requirements 

42 U.S.C. 6299 et seq. authorizes DOE 

to enforce compliance with the energy 

and water conservation standards 

established for certain consumer 

products. On March 7, 2011, the 

Department revised, consolidated, and 

streamlined its existing certification, 

compliance, and enforcement 

regulations for certain consumer 

products and commercial and industrial 

equipment covered under EPCA, 

including clothes dryers. 76 FR 12422. 

These regulations are codified in 10 CFR 

429.21 (residential clothes dryers). 

The certification requirements for 

residential clothes dryers consist of a 

sampling plan for selection of units for 

testing and requirements for 

certification reports. Because DOE 

introduced a new metric (CEF) in the 

January 2011 TP Final Rule, DOE 

proposes to amend the provisions in 10 

CFR 429.21(a)(2) to include CEF, along 

with the existing measure of EF, in the 

list of metrics for which consumers 

would favor higher values. DOE is 

proposing to amend the reporting 

requirements in 10 CFR 429.21(b)(2) to 

require manufacturers, when using 

either appendix D or D1, to provide an 

indication if the clothes dryer has 

automatic termination controls and also 

to report the hourly Btu rating of the 

burner for gas clothes dryers. DOE is 

also proposing to amend 10 CFR 

429.21(b)(2) to require manufacturers, 

when using appendix D1, to include the 

CEF and to list the cycle setting 

selections for the energy test cycle as 

recorded in the proposed section 3.4.7 

of appendix D1 for each basic model. 

3. Compliance Date of Any Final 

Amended Test Procedures 

As stated in section I, DOE test 

procedures for clothes dryers are set 

forth in appendices D and D1 in 10 CFR 

part 430 subpart B. This proposal 

describes amendments to both 

appendices. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6293(c)(2), effective 180 days after DOE 

prescribes or establishes a new or 

amended test procedure, manufacturers 

must make representations of energy 

efficiency using that new or amended 

test procedure. Therefore, effective 180 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
178 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

11A searchable database of certified small 

businesses is available online at: http:// 

dsbs.sba.gov/dsbs/search/dsp_dsbs.cfm. 

days after the promulgation of any final 

amendments to the test procedure based 

on this proposal, manufacturers must 

make representations of energy 

efficiency, including certifications of 

compliance, using either appendix D or 

appendix D1. Manufacturers must use a 

single appendix for all representations, 

including certifications of compliance, 

and may not use appendix D for certain 

representations and appendix D1 for 

other representations. See DOE’s 

existing guidance on this topic for 

additional information, available at: 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/pdfs/tp_faq_2012- 

06-29.pdf. Compliance with DOE’s 

amended standards for clothes dryers, 

and corresponding use of the test 

procedures at Appendix D1 for all 

representations, including certifications 

of compliance, is required as of January 

1, 2015. (76 FR 52852 (Aug. 24, 2011), 

76 FR 52854 (Aug. 24, 2011)) 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has determined that test procedure 

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 

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 

(August 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003, to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE’s 

procedures and policies may be viewed 

on the Office of the General Counsel’s 

Web site (http://energy.gov/gc/officegeneral-counsel). DOE reviewed today’s 

NOPR under the provisions of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and the 

procedures and policies published on 

February 19, 2003. 

In conducting this review, DOE first 

determined the potential number of 

affected small entities. The Small 

Business Administration (SBA) 

considers an entity to be a small 

business if, together with its affiliates, it 

employs fewer than the threshold 

number of workers specified in 13 CFR 

part 121 according to the North 

American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) codes. The SBA’s Table 

of Size Standards is available at: 

http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/ 

documents/sba_homepage/ 

serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf. The threshold 

number for NAICS classification 

335224, Household Laundry Equipment 

Manufacturing, which includes clothes 

dryer manufacturers, is 1,000 

employees. 

As discussed in the January 2011 TP 

Final Rule, DOE noted that most of the 

manufacturers supplying clothes dryers 

are large multinational corporations. As 

part of the most recent energy 

conservation standards rulemaking for 

residential clothes dryers, DOE 

requested comment on whether there 

are any manufacturer subgroups, 

including potential small businesses, 

that it should consider for its analyses. 

DOE did not receive any comments 

regarding whether there are any 

residential clothes dryer manufacturers 

that would be considered small 

businesses. DOE then conducted a more 

focused inquiry of the companies that 

could be small business manufacturers 

of products covered by this rulemaking. 

During its market survey, DOE used all 

available public information to identify 

potential small manufacturers. DOE’s 

research included the AHAM 

membership directory, product 

databases (the AHRI, AHAM, CEC, and 

ENERGY STAR databases), individual 

company Web sites, and the SBA 

dynamic small business search 11 to find 

potential small business manufacturers. 

DOE also asked interested parties and 

industry representatives if they were 

aware of any other small business 

manufacturers during manufacturer 

interviews conducted and at DOE public 

meetings for the energy conservation 

standards rulemakings. DOE also 

contacted various companies, as 

necessary, to determine whether they 

met the SBA’s definition of a small 

business manufacturer of covered 

residential clothes dryers. DOE screened 

out companies that did not offer 

products covered by this rulemaking, 

did not meet the definition of a ‘‘small 

business,’’ or are foreign owned and 

operated. 

DOE initially identified at least 14 

manufacturers of residential clothes 

dryers that sold products in the United 

States. DOE determined that 13 of these 

companies exceeded the SBA’s 

maximum number of employees or were 

foreign-owned and operated. Thus, DOE 

identified only one potential small 

business manufacturer of residential 

clothes dryers. DOE could not locate 

this manufacturer on the dynamic small 

business search on the SBA Web site, 

but DOE nonetheless considered the 

economic impacts of the proposed test 

procedure amendments on this potential 

small business manufacturer. 

As discussed in section III.G.0, DOE 

does not believe the proposed active 

mode test procedure amendments in 

today’s NOPR to more accurately 

measure the effects of automatic cycle 

termination would result in any added 

test burden on manufacturers as 

compared to the current DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1. DOE is not 

proposing to require any additional test 

instruments or significantly different 

active mode testing methods and 

conditions that would require 

additional time for testing. For standby 

mode and off mode, DOE believes that 

the proposed test procedure 

amendments presented in section 0 

would not represent a significant 

economic impact. DOE notes that 

industry-standard instruments, such as 

the Yokogawa WT210/WT230 digital 

power meter, that meet the standby 

mode and off mode requirements of the 

current DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D1, also meet the 

requirements of the proposed 

amendments for standby mode and off 

mode in today’s NOPR. DOE also notes 

that the duration of a standby mode or 

off mode test period using the current 

test procedure in appendix D1 is 40 to 

50 minutes. As discussed in section 0, 

DOE recognizes that the test duration 

using the proposed standby and off 

mode test procedure may range from 15 

minutes to 3 hours depending on the 

stability of the measured power 

consumption. However, based on DOE’s 

testing of four clothes dryers from 

different manufacturers, DOE expects 

the test duration using the proposed 

standby and off mode test procedure to 

be approximately 30 to 45 minutes for 

most clothes dryers. In addition, DOE 

notes that most third party testing 

laboratories already use these or similar 

industry-standard power meters for 

clothes dryer testing. As a result, if the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 179 

small manufacturer decides to use a 

third party testing laboratory, DOE 

believes there would be a minimal, if 

any, increase in cost for standby mode 

and off mode testing. 

For these reasons, DOE certifies that 

the proposed rule, if adopted, would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 

regulatory flexibility analysis for this 

rulemaking. DOE seeks comment on the 

certification set forth above, and will 

transmit the certification and supporting 

statement of factual basis to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for 

review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

Manufacturers of clothes dryers must 

certify to DOE that their products 

comply with any applicable energy 

conservation standards. In certifying 

compliance, manufacturers must test 

their products according to the DOE test 

procedures for clothes dryers, including 

any amendments adopted for those test 

procedures. DOE has established 

regulations for the certification and 

recordkeeping requirements for all 

covered consumer products and 

commercial equipment, including 

clothes dryers. (76 FR 12422 (March 7, 

2011). The collection-of-information 

requirement for the certification and 

recordkeeping is subject to review and 

approval by OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement 

has been approved by OMB under OMB 

control number 1910–1400. Public 

reporting burden for the certification is 

estimated to average 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. 

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 is adopting 

test procedure amendments that it 

expects will be used to develop and 

implement future energy conservation 

standards for clothes dryers. 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 

environmental impact statement is 

required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999) imposes 

certain requirements on agencies 

formulating and implementing policies 

or regulations that preempt State law or 

that have Federalism implications. The 

Executive Order requires agencies to 

examine the constitutional and statutory 

authority supporting any action that 

would limit the policymaking discretion 

of the States and to carefully assess the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have Federalism implications. On 

March 14, 2000, DOE published a 

statement of policy describing the 

intergovernmental consultation process 

it will follow in the development of 

such regulations. 65 FR 13735.DOE has 

examined this proposed rule and has 

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. Section 3(b) of 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 

specifies any effect on existing Federal 

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct 

while promoting simplification and 

burden reduction; (4) specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 

12988 requires Executive agencies to 

review regulations in light of applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to 

determine whether they are met or it is 

unreasonable to meet one or more of 

them. DOE has completed the required 

review and determined that, to the 

extent permitted by law, 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. Pub. L. 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 small governments. On March 18, 

1997, DOE published a statement of 

policy on its process for 

intergovernmental consultation under 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
180 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at 

http://energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. DOE examined today’s 

proposed rule according to UMRA and 

its statement of policy and determined 

that the rule contains neither an 

intergovernmental mandate, nor a 

mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year, so these requirements do not 

apply. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

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 

DOE has determined, under Executive 

Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 

(March 18, 1988), that this regulation 

would not result in any takings that 

might require compensation under the 

Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001 

Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

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

for agencies to review most 

disseminations of information to the 

public under guidelines established by 

each agency pursuant to general 

guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). 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 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 

promulgated or is expected to lead to 

promulgation of a final rule, and that: 

(1) Is a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy; or 

(3) is designated by the Administrator of 

OIRA as a significant energy action. For 

any 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 action to amend the test 

procedure for measuring the energy 

efficiency of clothes dryers is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it 

would not have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, nor has it been designated as 

a significant energy action by the 

Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is 

not a significant energy action, and, 

accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 

Statement of Energy Effects. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the DOE 

Organization Act (Pub. L. 95–91), DOE 

must comply with 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 (FEAA; Pub. 

L. 95–70) (15 U.S.C. 788). Section 32 

essentially provides that, where a rule 

authorizes or requires use of commercial 

standards, the rulemaking must inform 

the public of the use and background of 

such standards. In addition, section 

32(c) requires DOE to consult with the 

Attorney General and the Chairman of 

the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 

concerning the impact of the 

commercial or industry standards on 

competition. 

The proposed rule incorporates 

testing methods contained in the 

commercial standard, IEC Standard 

62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power,’’ Edition 2.0, 2011–01. DOE 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., whether 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 

about the impact on competition of 

using the methods contained in this 

standard and will address any concerns 

when it publishes a response to the 

public comments on this NOPR. 

V. Public Participation 

A. Attendance at 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. 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 those 

wishing to bring laptops into the 

Forrestal Building will be required to 

obtain a property pass. Visitors should 

avoid bringing laptops, or allow an extra 

45 minutes. Persons can attend the 

public meeting via webinar. 

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 https:// 

www1.gotomeeting.com/register/ 

903943753. Participants are responsible 

for ensuring their systems are 

compatible with the webinar software. 

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared 

General Statements for Distribution 

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. The request 

and advance copy of statements must be 

received at least one week before the 

public meeting and may be emailed, 

hand-delivered, 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 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 181 

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. 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 permit, as time permits, other 

participants to comment briefly on any 

general statements. 

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. 

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 

regulations.gov. The regulations.gov 

web page will require you to provide 

your name and contact information. 

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. 

Do not submit to regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)). Comments submitted through 

regulations.gov cannot be claimed as 

CBI. Comments received through the 

Web site will waive any CBI claims for 

the information submitted. For 

information on submitting CBI, see the 

Confidential Business Information 

section below. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through regulations.gov before posting. 

Normally, comments will be posted 

within a few days of being submitted. 

However, if large volumes of comments 

are being processed simultaneously, 

your comment may not be viewable for 

up to several weeks. Please keep the 

comment tracking number that 

regulations.gov provides after you have 

successfully uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery, or mail. Comments and 

documents submitted via email, hand 

delivery, or mail also will be posted to 

regulations.gov. If you do not want your 

personal contact information to be 

publicly viewable, do not include it in 

your comment or any accompanying 

documents. Instead, provide your 

contact information on a cover letter. 

Include your first and last names, email 

address, telephone number, and 

optional mailing address. The cover 

letter will not be publicly viewable as 

long as it does not include any 

comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via mail or hand delivery, please 

provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It 

is not necessary to submit printed 

copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be 

accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are not 

secured, 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. 

According 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 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). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
182 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 on the following issues: 

1. Test Load 

DOE seeks comment on the proposal 

to continue using the DOE test load to 

maintain repeatability and 

reproducibility. DOE welcomes 

additional data on the test-to-test 

repeatability and lab-to-lab 

reproducibility of both the DOE and 

IEC/AHAM test load. (See section 

III.B.5) 

2. Automatic Cycle Termination Test 

Cycle 

DOE seeks comment on the proposed 

amendments to more accurately 

measure the effects of automatic cycle 

termination. DOE specifically requests 

comment on the proposed maximum 

allowable final RMC of 2 percent using 

the DOE test load. DOE further seeks 

comment on the proposed test cycle 

program settings, temperature settings, 

and dryness level settings. DOE also 

requests comment and additional test 

data on the proposed field use factor of 

0.80 for automatic cycle termination 

clothes dryers. (See section III.B.5) 

3. Timed Dry Test Cycle 

DOE seeks comment on the proposed 

test method for timer dryers. In 

particular, DOE welcomes comment on 

the proposed final RMC range of 1.0 

percent to 2.5 percent with the 

normalization of the per-cycle energy 

consumption to represent the energy 

consumption required to dry the test 

load to 4-percent RMC changed to 

represent the new target RMC of 2 

percent. DOE also seeks comment on the 

continued use of the 1.18 field use 

factor in the per-cycle energy 

consumption calculation for timer 

dryers. DOE welcomes comment on the 

determination to not measure the cooldown period for the timed dry test cycle 

due to the associated test burden and 

difficulties with determining the 

appropriated timed dry cycle time. DOE 

also welcomes comment on the 

proposed amendment to clarify that the 

clothes dryer should not be stopped 

intermittently in the middle of the 

timed dry test cycle for any reason. (See 

section III.B.5) 

4. Characteristics of Water for Wetting 

Test Load 

DOE welcomes comment on the 

determination to not propose 

amendments to include requirements 

for the characteristics of the water 

supply used for wetting the test load 

prior to the test cycle. DOE welcomes 

additional data evaluating the 

repeatability and reproducibility of test 

results using both appendix D1 water 

and water modified according to the 

requirements in IEC Standard 61121. 

(See section III.B.4) 

5. Incorporation by Reference of IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition) 

DOE invites comment on the 

adequacy of IEC Standard 62301 

(Second Edition) to measure standby 

mode and off mode power consumption 

for clothes dryers, and the suitability of 

incorporating into DOE regulations the 

following specific provisions from IEC 

Standard 62301 (Second Edition): 

section 4 (‘‘General conditions for 

measurements’’), paragraph 4.2, ‘‘Test 

room,’’ paragraph 4.3.2, ‘‘Supply voltage 

waveform,’’ and paragraph 4.4, ‘‘Power 

measuring instruments,’’ and section 5 

(‘‘Measurements’’), paragraph 5.1, 

‘‘General,’’ paragraph 5.2 ‘‘Preparation 

of product’’, and paragraph 5.3.2, 

‘‘Sampling method.’’ DOE also invites 

comment on the acceptability of 

measuring the total harmonic content, 

crest factor, and maximum current ratio 

before and after the actual test 

measurement if the power measuring 

instrument is unable to perform these 

measurements during the actual test 

measurement. (See section 0) 

6. Technical Correction to the 

Calculation of the Per-cycle Combined 

Total Energy Consumption 

DOE seeks comment on the proposed 

amendments to correct the section 

number reference for the per-cycle 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption contained in the 

calculation of the per-cycle combined 

total energy consumption contains in 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1, 

section 4.6. (See section III.D) 

7. Clarifications to Test Conditions 

DOE seeks comment on the proposed 

amendments to clarify the cycle settings 

used for the test cycle. DOE also seeks 

comment on the proposed amendments 

to clarify for gas clothes dryer the 

requirements for the hourly British 

thermal unit (Btu) rating of the burner 

and the regulator outlet pressure for 

clothes dryers equipped with a gas 

appliance pressure regulator. (See 

section III.E) 

8. Effects of Proposed Amendments for 

Automatic Cycle Termination on Energy 

Conservation Standards 

DOE welcomes comments and 

additional data on the effects of the 

proposed test procedure amendments 

on the current energy conservation 

standards in both 10 CFR 430.32(h)(2) 

and (3). In particular, DOE seeks 

comment on the proposed 

determination to not amend the energy 

conservation standards based on the 

proposed test procedure amendments 

for automatic cycle termination due to 

the anti-backsliding provisions in 42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(1). DOE also welcomes 

comment on the determination and 

testing results showing that the 

proposed standby mode and off mode 

test procedure amendments would not 

measurably affect the measured 

efficiency as compared to the existing 

DOE test procedure in 10 CFR 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1. (See section 

III.F) 

9. Test Burden 

DOE seeks comment on any added 

test burden associated with the 

proposed amendments. When providing 

comments regarding testing burden, 

DOE request that commenters provide 

specific details and quantify any 

burdens. (See section III.G.0) 

VI. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects 

10 CFR Part 429 

Energy conservation, Household 

appliances, 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 December 

14, 2012. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE is proposing to amend 

parts 429 and 430 of title 10 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations, as set forth 

below: 

PART 429—CERTIFICATION, 

COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 183 

■ 2. Section 429.21 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(ii) 

introductory text; and 

■ b. Revising paragraph (b)(2). 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 429.21 Residential clothes dryers. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) Any represented value of the 

energy factor, combined energy factor, 

or other measure of energy consumption 

of a basic model for which consumers 

would favor higher values shall be less 

than or equal to the lower of: 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a 

certification report shall include the 

following public product-specific 

information: When using appendix D, 

the energy factor in pounds per kilowatt 

hours (lb/kWh), the capacity in cubic 

feet (cu ft), the voltage in volts (V) (for 

electric dryers only), an indication if the 

dryer has automatic termination 

controls, and the hourly British thermal 

unit (Btu) rating of the burner (for gas 

dryers only); when using appendix D1, 

the combined energy factor in pounds 

per kilowatt hours (lb/kWh), the 

capacity in cubic feet (cu ft), the voltage 

in volts (V) (for electric dryers only), an 

indication if the dryer has automatic 

termination controls, the hourly Btu 

rating of the burner (for gas dryers only), 

and a list of the cycle setting selections 

for the energy test cycle as recorded in 

section 3.4.7 of appendix D1 for each 

basic model. 

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. 

§ 430.3 [Amended]. 

■ 4. Section 430.3 is amended by: 

■ a. Removing ‘‘appendix D1,’’ from 

paragraph (m)(1); and 

■ b. Adding ‘‘appendix D1,’’ after 

‘‘appendix C1,’’ in (m)(2). 

■ 5. Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 

430 is amended: 

■ a. Revise the introductory text; 

■ b. In section 2. Test Conditions, by 

revising sections 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2; and 

■ c. In section 3. Test Methods and 

Measurements, by revising section 3.3. 

The revisions read as follows: 

Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers 

Note: Effective 180 days after the 

promulgation of any final amendments to the 

test procedure, manufacturers must make 

representations of energy efficiency, 

including certifications of compliance, using 

either appendix D or appendix D1. 

Manufacturers must use a single appendix for 

all representations, including certifications of 

compliance, and may not use appendix D for 

certain representations and appendix D1 for 

other representations. Compliance with 

DOE’s amended standards for clothes dryers, 

and corresponding use of the test procedures 

at Appendix D1 for all representations, 

including certifications of compliance, is 

required as of January 1, 2015. 

* * * * * 

2. Testing Conditions 

* * * * * 

2.3.2 Gas supply. 

2.3.2.1 Natural gas. Maintain the gas 

supply to the clothes dryer at a normal inlet 

test pressure immediately ahead of all 

controls at 7 to 10 inches of water column. 

If the clothes dryer is equipped with a gas 

appliance pressure regulator, the regulator 

outlet pressure at the normal test pressure 

shall be within ±10 percent of the value 

specified by the manufacturer. The hourly 

Btu rating of the burner shall be maintained 

within ±5 percent of the rating specified by 

the manufacturer. If the requirement to 

maintain the hourly Btu rating of the burner 

within ±5 percent of the rating specified by 

the manufacturer cannot be achieved under 

the allowable range in gas inlet test pressure, 

the orifice of the gas burner should be 

modified as necessary to achieve the required 

Btu rating. The natural gas supplied should 

have a heating value of approximately 1,025 

Btus per standard cubic foot. The actual 

heating value, Hn2, in Btus per standard 

cubic foot, for the natural gas to be used in 

the test shall be obtained either from 

measurements made by the manufacturer 

conducting the test using a standard 

continuous flow calorimeter as described in 

section 2.4.6 or by the purchase of bottled 

natural gas whose Btu rating is certified to be 

at least as accurate a rating as could be 

obtained from measurements with a standard 

continuous flow calorimeter as described in 

section 2.4.6. 

2.3.2.2 Propane gas. Maintain the gas 

supply to the clothes dryer at a normal inlet 

test pressure immediately ahead of all 

controls at 11 to 13 inches of water column. 

If the clothes dryer is equipped with a gas 

appliance pressure regulator, the regulator 

outlet pressure at the normal test pressure 

shall be within ±10 percent of the value 

specified by the manufacturer. The hourly 

Btu rating of the burner shall be maintained 

within ±5 percent of the rating specified by 

the manufacturer. If the requirement to 

maintain the hourly Btu rating of the burner 

within ±5 percent of the rating specified by 

the manufacturer cannot be achieved under 

the allowable range in gas inlet test pressure, 

the orifice of the gas burner should be 

modified as necessary to achieve the required 

Btu rating. The propane gas supplied should 

have a heating value of approximately 2,500 

Btus per standard cubic foot. The actual 

heating value, Hp, in Btus per standard cubic 

foot, for the propane gas to be used in the test 

shall be obtained either from measurements 

made by the manufacturer conducting the 

test using a standard continuous flow 

calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6 or 

by the purchase of bottled gas whose Btu 

rating is certified to be at least as accurate a 

rating as could be obtained from 

measurement with a standard continuous 

calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6. 

* * * * * 

3. Test Procedures and Measurements 

* * * * * 

3.3 Test cycle. Operate the clothes dryer 

at the maximum temperature setting and, if 

equipped with a timer, at the maximum time 

setting. Any other optional cycle settings that 

do not affect the temperature and time 

settings shall be tested in the as-shipped 

position. If the clothes dryer does not have 

a separate temperature setting selection on 

the control panel, the maximum time setting 

should be used for the drying test cycle. Dry 

the test load until the moisture content of the 

test load is between 2.5 percent and 5.0 

percent of the bone-dry weight of the test 

load, but do not permit the dryer to advance 

into cool down. If required, reset the timer 

or automatic dry control. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Appendix D1 to Subpart B of Part 

430 is amended: 

■ a. By revising the introductory text; 

■ b. In section 1. Definitions, by: 

■ 1. Redesignating sections 1.5 through 

1.18 and 1.19 as sections 1.6 through 

1.19 and 1.21, respectively; 

■ 2. Revising newly designated section 

1.12; 

■ 3. Adding sections 1.5 and 1.20; 

c. In section 2. Test Conditions, by: 

1. Revising sections 2.1, 2.3.1.1, 

2.3.2.1, 2.3.2.2, 2.4.7, 2.6.3, 2.7.1, and 

2.7.2; 2. Adding sections 2.1.1 through 

2.1.3; 

d. In section 3. Test Methods and 

Measurements, by: 

1. Revising sections 3.3, 3.6, 3.6.1, 

and 3.6.2; 

2. Adding sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2, and 

3.4.7; and 

e. In section 4. Calculation of Derived 

Results From Test Measurements, by 

revising sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.6. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

Appendix D1 to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers 

Note: Effective 180 days after the 

promulgation of any final amendments to the 

test procedure, manufacturers must make 

representations of energy efficiency, 

including certifications of compliance, using 

either appendix D or appendix D1. 

Manufacturers must use a single appendix for 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
184 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

all representations, including certifications of 

compliance, and may not use appendix D for 

certain representations and appendix D1 for 

other representations. Compliance with 

DOE’s amended standards for clothes dryers, 

and corresponding use of the test procedures 

at Appendix D1 for all representations, 

including certifications of compliance, is 

required as of January 1, 2015. 

1. Definitions 

* * * * * 

1.5 ‘‘Automatic termination control 

dryer’’ means a clothes dryer which can be 

preset to carry out at least one sequence of 

operations to be terminated by means of a 

system assessing, directly or indirectly, the 

moisture content of the load. An automatic 

termination control dryer with 

supplementary timer or that may also be 

manually controlled shall be tested as an 

automatic termination control dryer. 

* * * * * 

1.12 ‘‘IEC 62301’’ means the test standard 

published by the International 

Electrotechnical Commission (‘‘IEC’’) titled 

‘‘Household electrical appliances— 

Measurement of standby power,’’ Publication 

62301 (Edition 2.0 2011–01) (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

* * * * * 

1.20 ‘‘Timer dryer’’ means a clothes dryer 

that can be preset to carry out at least one 

operation to be terminated by a timer, but 

may also be manually controlled, and does 

not include any automatic termination 

function. 

* * * * * 

2. Testing Conditions 

2.1 Installation. 

2.1.1 All clothes dryers. For both 

conventional clothes dryers and ventless 

clothes dryers, as defined in sections 1.8 and 

1.21 of this appendix, install the clothes 

dryer in accordance with manufacturer’s 

instructions. If the manufacturer’s 

instructions do not specify the installation 

requirements for a certain component, it shall 

be tested in the as-shipped condition. Where 

the manufacturer gives the option to use the 

dryer both with and without a duct, the dryer 

shall be tested without the exhaust simulator 

described in section 3.3.5.1 of AHAM HLD– 

1 (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). All 

external joints should be taped to avoid air 

leakage. For drying testing, disconnect all 

console lights or other lighting systems on 

the clothes dryer which do not consume 

more than 10 watts during the clothes dryer 

test cycle. For standby and off mode testing, 

the clothes dryer shall also be installed in 

accordance with section 5, paragraph 5.2 of 

IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3), disregarding the provisions 

regarding batteries and the determination, 

classification, and testing of relevant modes. 

For standby and off mode testing, do not 

disconnect console lights or other lighting 

systems. 

2.1.2 Conventional clothes dryers. For 

conventional clothes dryers, as defined in 

section 1.8 of this appendix, the dryer 

exhaust shall be restricted by adding the 

AHAM exhaust simulator described in 

section 3.3.5.1 of AHAM HLD–1 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

2.1.3 Ventless clothes dryers. For ventless 

clothes dryers, as defined in section 1.21, the 

dryer shall be tested without the AHAM 

exhaust simulator. If the manufacturer gives 

the option to use a ventless clothes dryer, 

with or without a condensation box, the 

dryer shall be tested with the condensation 

box installed. For ventless clothes dryers, the 

condenser unit of the dryer must remain in 

place and not be taken out of the dryer for 

any reason between tests. 

* * * * * 

2.3.1.1 Supply voltage waveform. For the 

clothes dryer standby mode and off mode 

testing, maintain the electrical supply voltage 

waveform indicated in section 4, paragraph 

4.3.2 of IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; 

see § 430.3). If the power measuring 

instrument used for testing is unable to 

measure and record the total harmonic 

content during the test measurement period, 

it is acceptable to measure and record the 

total harmonic content immediately before 

and after the test measurement period. 

2.3.2 Gas supply. 

2.3.2.1 Natural gas. Maintain the gas 

supply to the clothes dryer immediately 

ahead of all controls at a pressure of 7 to 10 

inches of water column. If the clothes dryer 

is equipped with a gas appliance pressure 

regulator for which the manufacturer 

specifies an outlet pressure, the regulator 

outlet pressure shall be within ±10 percent of 

the value specified by the manufacturer. The 

hourly Btu rating of the burner shall be 

maintained within ±5 percent of the rating 

specified by the manufacturer. If the 

requirement to maintain the hourly Btu 

rating of the burner within ±5 percent of the 

rating specified by the manufacturer cannot 

be achieved under the allowable range in gas 

inlet test pressure, the orifice of the gas 

burner should be modified as necessary to 

achieve the required Btu rating. The natural 

gas supplied should have a heating value of 

approximately 1,025 Btus per standard cubic 

foot. The actual heating value, Hn2, in Btus 

per standard cubic foot, for the natural gas to 

be used in the test shall be obtained either 

from measurements made by the 

manufacturer conducting the test using a 

standard continuous flow calorimeter as 

described in section 2.4.6 or by the purchase 

of bottled natural gas whose Btu rating is 

certified to be at least as accurate a rating as 

could be obtained from measurements with 

a standard continuous flow calorimeter as 

described in section 2.4.6. 

2.3.2.2 Propane gas. Maintain the gas 

supply to the clothes dryer immediately 

ahead of all controls at a pressure of 11 to 

13 inches of water column. If the clothes 

dryer is equipped with a gas appliance 

pressure regulator for which the 

manufacturer specifies an outlet pressure, the 

regulator outlet pressure shall be within ±10 

percent of the value specified by the 

manufacturer. The hourly Btu rating of the 

burner shall be maintained within ±5 percent 

of the rating specified by the manufacturer. 

If the requirement to maintain the hourly Btu 

rating of the burner within ±5 percent of the 

rating specified by the manufacturer cannot 

be achieved under the allowable range in gas 

inlet test pressure, the orifice of the gas 

burner should be modified as necessary to 

achieve the required Btu rating. The propane 

gas supplied should have a heating value of 

approximately 2,500 Btus per standard cubic 

foot. The actual heating value, Hp, in Btus per 

standard cubic foot, for the propane gas to be 

used in the test shall be obtained either from 

measurements made by the manufacturer 

conducting the test using a standard 

continuous flow calorimeter as described in 

section 2.4.6 or by the purchase of bottled gas 

whose Btu rating is certified to be at least as 

accurate a rating as could be obtained from 

measurement with a standard continuous 

calorimeter as described in section 2.4.6. 

* * * * * 

2.4.7 Standby mode and off mode watt 

meter. The watt meter used to measure 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption shall meet the requirements 

specified in section 4, paragraph 4.4 of IEC 

62301(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

If the power measuring instrument used for 

testing is unable to measure and record the 

crest factor, power factor, or maximum 

current ratio during the test measurement 

period, it is acceptable to measure the crest 

factor, power factor, and maximum current 

ratio immediately before and after the test 

measurement period. 

* * * * * 

2.6.3 Test Cloth Preconditioning. 

A new test cloth load and energy stuffer 

cloths shall be treated as follows: 

(1) Bone dry the load to a weight change 

of ±1 percent, or less, as prescribed in section 

1.6 of this appendix. 

(2) Place the test cloth load in a standard 

clothes washer set at the maximum water fill 

level. Wash the load for 10 minutes in soft 

water (17 parts per million hardness or less), 

using 60.8 grams of AHAM standard test 

detergent Formula 3.Wash water temperature 

should be maintained at 140° ± 5 °F (60° ± 

2.7 °C). Rinse water temperature is to be 

controlled at 100° ± 5 °F (37.7 ± 2.7 °C). 

(3) Rinse the load again at the same water 

temperature. 

(4) Bone dry the load as prescribed in 

section 1.6 of this appendix and weigh the 

load. 

(5) This procedure is repeated until there 

is a weight change of 1 percent or less. 

(6) A final cycle is to be a hot water wash 

with no detergent, followed by two warm 

water rinses. 

* * * * * 

2.7.1 Compact size dryer load. Prepare a 

bone-dry test load of energy cloths that 

weighs 3.00 pounds ± .03 pounds. The test 

load can be adjusted to achieve proper 

weight by adding energy stuffer cloths, but 

no more than five stuffer cloths may be 

added per load. Dampen the load by agitating 

it in water whose temperature is 60 °F ± 5 

°F and consists of 0 to 17 parts per million 

hardness for approximately 2 minutes to 

saturate the fabric. Then, extract water from 

the wet test load by spinning the load until 

the moisture content of the load is between 

52.5 and 57.5 percent of the bone-dry weight 

of the test load. Make a final mass 

adjustment, such that the moisture content is 

57.5 percent ± 0.33 percent by adding water 

uniformly to the load in a very fine spray. 

2.7.2 Standard size dryer load. Prepare a 

bone-dry test load of energy cloths that 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 185 

weighs 8.45 pounds ± .085 pounds. The test 

load can be adjusted to achieve proper 

weight by adding stuffer cloths, but no more 

than five stuffer cloths may be added per 

load. Dampen the load by agitating it in water 

whose temperature is 60 °F ± 5°F and 

consists of 0 to 17 parts per million hardness 

for approximately 2 minutes to saturate the 

fabric. Then, extract water from the wet test 

load by spinning the load until the moisture 

content of the load is between 52.5 and 57.5 

percent of the bone-dry weight of the test 

load. Make a final mass adjustment, such that 

the moisture content is 57.5 percent ± 0.33 

percent by adding water uniformly to the 

load in a very fine spray. 

* * * * * 

3. Test Procedures and Measurements 

* * * * * 

3.3 Test cycle. 

3.3.1 Timer dryers. For timer dryers, as 

defined in section 1.20 of this appendix, 

operate the clothes dryer at the maximum 

temperature setting and, if equipped with a 

timer, at the maximum time setting. Any 

other optional cycle settings that do not affect 

the temperature and time settings shall be 

tested in the as-shipped position. If the 

clothes dryer does not have a separate 

temperature setting selection on the control 

panel, the maximum time setting should be 

used for the drying test cycle. Dry the load 

until the moisture content of the test load is 

between 1 and 2.5 percent of the bone-dry 

weight of the test load, at which point the 

test cycle is stopped, but do not permit the 

dryer to advance into cool down. If required, 

reset the timer to increase the length of the 

drying cycle. After stopping the test cycle, 

remove and weigh the test load. The clothes 

dryer shall not be stopped intermittently in 

the middle of the test cycle for any reason. 

Record the data specified by section 3.4 of 

this appendix. If the dryer automatically 

stops during a cycle because the 

condensation box is full of water, the test is 

stopped, and the test run is invalid, in which 

case the condensation box shall be emptied 

and the test re-run from the beginning. For 

ventless dryers, as defined in section 1.21 of 

this appendix, during the time between two 

cycles, the door of the dryer shall be closed 

except for loading (and unloading). 

3.3.2 Automatic termination control 

dryers. For automatic termination control 

dryers, as defined in section 1.5 of this 

appendix, a ‘‘normal’’ program shall be 

selected for the test cycle. For dryers that do 

not have a ‘‘normal’’ program, the cycle 

recommended by the manufacturer for drying 

cotton or linen clothes shall be selected. 

Where the drying temperature setting can be 

chosen independently of the program, it shall 

be set to the maximum. Where the dryness 

level setting can be chosen independently of 

the program, it shall be set to the ‘‘normal’’ 

or ‘‘medium’’ dryness level setting. If such 

designation is not provided, then the dryness 

level shall be set at the mid-point between 

the minimum and maximum settings. Any 

other optional cycle settings that do not affect 

the program, temperature and dryness 

settings shall be tested in the as-shipped 

position. Operate the clothes dryer until the 

completion of the programmed cycle, 

including the cool down period. After the 

completion of the test cycle, remove and 

weigh the test load. Record the data specified 

in section 3.4 of this appendix. If the final 

moisture content is greater than 2 percent, 

the test shall be invalid and a new run shall 

be conducted using the highest dryness level 

setting. If the dryer automatically stops 

during a cycle because the condensation box 

is full of water, the test is stopped, and the 

test run is invalid, in which case the 

condensation box shall be emptied and the 

test re-run from the beginning. For ventless 

dryers, during the time between two cycles, 

the door of the dryer shall be closed except 

for loading (and unloading). 

* * * * * 

3.4.7 The cycle settings selected, in 

accordance with section 3.3.2 of this 

appendix, for the automatic termination 

control dryer test. 

* * * * * 

3.6 Standby mode and off mode power. 

Establish the testing conditions set forth in 

Section 2 ‘‘Testing Conditions’’ of this 

appendix. For clothes dryers that take some 

time to enter a stable state from a higher 

power state as discussed in Section 5, 

Paragraph 5.1, Note 1 of IEC 62301 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3), 

allow sufficient time for the clothes dryer to 

reach the lower power state before 

proceeding with the test measurement. 

Follow the test procedure specified in section 

5, paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301 for testing in 

each possible mode as described in sections 

3.6.1 and 3.6.2 of this appendix. 

3.6.1 If a clothes dryer has an inactive 

mode, as defined in section 1.13 of this 

appendix, measure and record the average 

inactive mode power of the clothes dryer, 

PIA, in watts. 

3.6.2 If a clothes dryer has an off mode, 

as defined in section 1.16 of this appendix, 

measure and record the average off mode 

power of the clothes dryer, POFF, in watts. 

4. Calculation of Derived Results From Test 

Measurements 

4.1 Total per-cycle electric dryer energy 

consumption. Calculate the total electric 

dryer energy consumption per cycle, Ece, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle and 

defined as: 

Ece = Et × field use, 

For automatic termination control dryers, 

and, 

Ece = [55.5/(Ww ¥ Wd)] × Et × field use, 

For timer dryers 

Where 

55.5 = an experimentally established value 

for the percent reduction in the moisture 

content of the test load during a 

laboratory test cycle expressed as a 

percent. 

Et = the energy recorded in section 3.4.5 of 

this appendix. 

field use = field use factor 

= 1.18, the field use factor for clothes 

dryers with time termination control 

systems only without any automatic 

termination control functions. 

= 0.80, the field use factor for clothes 

dryers with automatic control systems 

that meet the requirements of the 

definition for automatic control systems 

in sections 1.5, 1.15 and 1.19 of this 

appendix, including those that also have 

a supplementary timer control, or that 

may also be manually controlled. 

Ww = the moisture content of the wet test 

load as recorded in section 3.4.2 of this 

appendix. 

Wd = the moisture content of the dry test load 

as recorded in section 3.4.3 of this 

appendix. 

4.2 Per-cycle gas dryer electrical energy 

consumption. Calculate the gas dryer 

electrical energy consumption per cycle, Ege, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle and 

defined as: 

Ege = Ete × field use, 

For automatic termination control dryers, 

and, 

Ege = [55.5/(Ww ¥Wd)] × Ete × field use, 

for timer dryers 

Where 

Ete = the energy recorded in section 3.4.6.1 

of this appendix. 

field use, 55.5, Ww, Wd as defined in section 

4.1 of this appendix 

4.3 Per-cycle gas dryer gas energy 

consumption. Calculate the gas dryer gas 

energy consumption per cycle, Ege. expressed 

in Btus per cycle and defined as: 

Egg = Etg × field use × GEF 

for automatic termination control dryers, 

and, 

Egg=[55.5/(Ww ¥ Wd)] × Etg × field use × GEF 

for time dryers 

Where 

Etg = the energy recorded in section 3.4.6.2 

of this appendix. 

GEF = corrected gas heat value (Btu per cubic 

feet) as defined in section 3.4.6.3 of this 

appendix, 

field use, 55.5, Ww, Wd as defined in section 

4.1 of this appendix. 

* * * * * 

4.6 Per-cycle combined total energy 

consumption expressed in kilowatt-hours. 

Calculate the per-cycle combined total energy 

consumption, ECC, expressed in kilowatthours per cycle and defined for an electric 

clothes dryer as: 

ECC = Ece + ETSO

Where: 

Ece = the energy recorded in section 4.1 of 

this appendix, and 

ETSO = the energy recorded in section 4.5 of 

this appendix, 

and defined for a gas clothes dryer as: 

ECC = Ecg + ETSO

Where: 

Ecg = the energy recorded in section 4.4 of 

this appendix, and 

ETSO = the energy recorded in section 4.5 of 

this appendix. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–30677 Filed 12–31–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with