Tuesday, 

June 29, 2010 

Part III 

Department of 

Energy 

10 CFR Part 430 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Test Procedures for 

Clothes Dryers and Room Air 

Conditioners; Proposed Rule 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37594 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2008–BT–TP–0010] 

RIN 1904–AC02 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Test Procedures 

for Clothes Dryers and Room Air 

Conditioners 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking and public 

meeting. 

SUMMARY: On December 9, 2008, the 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NOPR) in which it 

proposed amendments to its test 

procedures for residential clothes dryers 

and room air conditioners to provide for 

measurement of standby mode and off 

mode power use by these products in 

order to implement recent amendments 

under the Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) to the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act 

(EPCA). In response to comments on the 

NOPR, DOE conducted additional 

investigations to address certain issues 

raised in these comments. In today’s 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking (SNOPR), DOE is continuing 

to propose amendments to incorporate 

into its test procedures relevant 

provisions from the International 

Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 

Standard 62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power,’’ First Edition 2005–06, 

including language to clarify application 

of these provisions for measuring 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption in clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners. In addition, DOE is 

proposing to adopt definitions of modes 

based on the relevant provisions from 

IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition 

Committee Draft for Vote. DOE is also 

proposing to amend its test procedures 

for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners to address active mode 

energy use. Specifically, today’s 

proposal addresses testing methods for 

clothes dryer automatic cycle 

termination, vent-less clothes dryers, 

test cloth preconditioning for clothes 

dryer energy tests, test conditions for 

gas clothes dryers, and current clothes 

dryer usage patterns and capabilities as 

well as the references in the current 

room air conditioner and clothes dryer 

test procedure. DOE will hold a public 

meeting to discuss and receive 

comments on the issues presented in 

this notice. 

DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting 

on Wednesday, July 14, 2010 from 9 

a.m. to 4 p.m., in Washington, DC. DOE 

must receive requests to speak at the 

public meeting before 4 p.m., 

Wednesday, July 7, 2010. DOE must 

receive a signed original and an 

electronic copy of statements to be given 

at the public meeting before 4 p.m., 

Wednesday, July 7, 2010. 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding the SNOPR before 

and after the public meeting, but no 

later than August 30, 2010. See section 

VI, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ of this 

SNOPR 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 20585–0121. To attend 

the public meeting, please notify Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945. 

(Please note that foreign nationals 

visiting DOE Headquarters are subject to 

advance security screening procedures. 

Any foreign national wishing to 

participate in the public meeting should 

advise DOE as soon as possible by 

contacting Ms. Edwards to initiate the 

necessary procedures.) 

Any comments submitted must 

identify the SNOPR on Test Procedures 

for Clothes Dryers and Room Air 

Conditioners, and provide the docket 

number EERE–2008–BT–TP–0010 and/ 

or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 

1904–AC02. Comments may be 

submitted using any of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. E-mail: AHAM2–2008–TP– 

0010@hq.doe.gov. Include docket 

number EERE–2008–BT–TP–0010 and/ 

or RIN 1904–AC02 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. Please 

submit one signed paper original. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 586–2945. Please submit one 

signed paper original. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see section VI, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ of 

this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, visit the U.S. 

Department of Energy, Resource Room 

of the Building Technologies Program, 

950 L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–2945, 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards at the 

above telephone number for additional 

information about visiting the Resource 

Room. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Margaret Sullivan, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1604. E-mail: 

Margaret.Sullivan@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Francine Pinto, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–72, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–7432. E-mail: 

Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov. 

For information on how to submit or 

review public comments and on 

how to participate in the public 

meeting, contact Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2945. E-mail: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Authority 

II. Summary of the Proposal 

III. Discussion 

A. Products Covered by the Test Procedure 

Changes 

B. Clothes Dryer and Room Air Conditioner 

Standby Mode and Off Mode Test 

Procedures 

1. Incorporating by Reference IEC Standard 

62301 for Measuring Standby Mode and 

Off Mode Power in Clothes Dryers and 

Room Air Conditioners 

2. Determination of Modes To Be 

Incorporated 

3. Adding Specifications for the Test 

Methods and Measurements for Clothes 

Dryer and Room Air Conditioner 

Standby Mode and Off Mode Testing 

a. Clothes Dryers 

b. Room Air Conditioners 

4. Calculation of Energy Use Associated 

With Standby Modes and Off Mode 

a. Clothes Dryers 

b. Room Air Conditioners 

5. Measures of Energy Consumption 

a. Clothes Dryers 

b. Room Air Conditioners 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37595 

1All references to EPCA refer to the statute as 

amended including through the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007, Public Law 

110–140. 

C. Clothes Dryer and Room Air Conditioner 

Active Mode Test Procedures 

1. Correction of Text Describing Energy 

Factor Calculation for Clothes Dryers 

2. Automatic Cycle Termination for 

Clothes Dryers 

3. Test Procedure for Vent-Less Clothes 

Dryers 

4. Detergent Specifications for Clothes 

Dryer Test Cloth Preconditioning 

5. Changes To Reflect Current Usage 

Patterns and Capabilities 

a. Clothes Dryer Number of Annual Cycles 

b. Clothes Dryer Initial Remaining 

Moisture Content 

c. Clothes Dryer Test Load Weight 

d. Room Air Conditioner Annual Operating 

Hours 

e. Room Air Conditioner Part-Load 

Performance 

f. Room Air Conditioner Ambient Test 

Conditions 

6. Room Air Conditioner Referenced Test 

Procedures 

7. Clothes Dryer Referenced Test Procedure 

8. Technical Correction for the Per-Cycle 

Gas Dryer Continuously Burning Pilot 

Light Gas Energy Consumption 

9. Clarification of the Gas Supply Test 

Conditions for Gas Clothes Dryers 

D. Compliance With Other EPCA 

Requirements 

1. Test Burden 

2. Potential Incorporation of IEC Standard 

62087 

3. Integration of Standby Mode and Off 

Mode Energy Consumption Into the 

Energy Efficiency Metrics 

IV. Effects of Test Procedure Revisions on 

Compliance With Standards 

V. Procedural Requirements 

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 

VI. Public Participation 

A. Attendance at the Public Meeting 

B. Procedure for Submitting Requests To 

Speak 

C. Conduct of Public Meeting 

D. Submission of Comments 

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

1. Incorporation of IEC Standard 62301 

2. Standby Mode Definitions 

3. Clothes Dryer Standby Modes 

4. Room Air Conditioner Standby Modes 

5. Network Mode 

6. Test Room Conditions 

7. Energy-Use Calculation for Standby and 

Off Modes for Clothes Dryers 

8. Energy-Use Calculation for Standby and 

Off Modes for Room Air Conditioners 

9. Clothes Dryer Testing Procedures To 

Account for Automatic Cycle 

Termination 

10. Water Temperature for Clothes Dryer 

Test Load Preparation 

11. Cycles and Settings for Timer Dryer 

and Automatic Termination Control 

Dryer Testing 

12. Cool-Down Period for Automatic 

Termination Control Dryer Testing 

13. Incorporation of Testing Procedures for 

Vent-Less Clothes Dryers 

14. Number of Valid Clothes Dryer Test 

Cycles 

15. Detergent Specifications for Test Cloth 

Preconditioning 

16. Clothes Dryer Number of Annual Use 

Cycles 

17. Clothes Dryer Initial Remaining 

Moisture Content 

18. Clothes Dryer Test Load Weight 

19. Room Air Conditioner Annual 

Operating Hours 

20. Room Air Conditioner Ambient Test 

Conditions 

21. Room Air Conditioner Referenced Test 

Procedures 

22. Clothes Dryer Referenced Test 

Procedure 

23. Technical Correction for the per-Cycle 

Gas Dryer Continuously Burning Pilot 

Light Gas Energy Consumption 

24. Clarification of Gas Supply Test 

Conditions for Gas Clothes Dryers 

25. Effects of Test Procedure Revisions on 

Compliance With Energy Conservation 

Standards 

VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Background and Authority 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

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

seq.; ‘‘EPCA’’ or, in context, ‘‘the Act’’) 

sets forth a variety of provisions 

designed to improve energy efficiency. 

Part A of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) 

establishes the ‘‘Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles,’’ including clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners (all of 

which are referred to below as ‘‘covered 

products’’).1 (42 U.S.C. 6291(1)–(2) and 

6292(a)(2) and (8)). 

Under the Act, this program consists 

essentially of three parts: (1) Testing; (2) 

labeling; and (3) Federal energy 

conservation standards. The testing 

requirements consist of test procedures 

that, pursuant to EPCA, manufacturers 

of covered products must use as the 

basis for certifying to DOE that their 

products comply with applicable energy 

conservation standards adopted under 

EPCA and for representations about the 

efficiency of those products. Similarly, 

DOE must use these test requirements to 

determine whether the products comply 

with EPCA standards. Under 42 U.S.C. 

6293, EPCA sets forth criteria and 

procedures for DOE’s adoption and 

amendment of such test procedures. 

EPCA provides that any test procedures 

prescribed or amended under this 

section shall be reasonably designed to 

produce test results which measure 

energy efficiency, energy use or 

estimated annual operating cost of a 

covered product during a representative 

average use cycle or period of use, as 

determined by the Secretary of Energy, 

and shall not be unduly burdensome to 

conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In 

addition, if DOE determines that a test 

procedure amendment is warranted, it 

must publish proposed test procedures 

and offer the public an opportunity to 

present oral and written comments 

thereon, with a comment period no less 

than 60 days and not to exceed 270 

days. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) 

Finally, in any rulemaking to amend 

a test procedure, DOE must determine to 

what extent, if any, the proposed test 

procedure would alter the measured 

energy efficiency of any covered 

product as determined under the 

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

6293(e)(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. 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)) EPCA 

also states that 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 amended energy 

conservation standard. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(e)(3)) 

DOE’s test procedures for clothes 

dryers are found at 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D. DOE established 

its test procedure for clothes dryers in 

a final rule published in the Federal 

Register on May 19, 1981. 46 FR 27324. 

The test procedure includes provisions 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37596 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

2 ‘‘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) 

3ANSI standards are available for purchase at 

http://www.ansi.org. 

4ASHRAE standards are available for purchase at 

http://www.ashrae.org. 

5Public Law 110–140 (enacted Dec. 19, 2007). 

6 IEC standards are available for purchase at: 

http://www.iec.ch. 

7Multiple editions of this standard are referenced 

in this final rule. Unless otherwise indicated, the 

terms ‘‘IEC Standard 62301’’ or ‘‘IEC Standard 62301 

First Edition’’ refer to ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances–measurement of standby power,’’ First 

Edition 2005–06. 

8RMC 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. 

9A notation in this form provides a reference for 

information that is in the docket of DOE’s 

rulemaking to develop energy conservation 

standards for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners (Docket No. EERE–2007–BT–STD– 

0010), which is maintained in the Resource Room 

of the Building Technologies Program. This 

notation indicates that the statement preceding the 

reference was made in DOE’s Framework 

Document, which is document number 1 in the 

docket for the clothes dryer and room air 

conditioner energy conservation standards 

rulemaking, and appears at pages 4–6 of that 

document. 

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’’ 2 state. 

DOE’s test procedures for room air 

conditioners are found at 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix F. DOE 

established its room air conditioner test 

procedure on June 1, 1977, and 

redesignated and amended it on June 

29, 1979. 42 FR 27898; 44 FR 37938. 

The existing room air conditioner test 

procedure incorporates by reference two 

industry test standards: (1) American 

National Standard (ANS) (since 

renamed American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI)) Z234.1–1972, ‘‘Room 

Air Conditioners;’’ 3 and (2) American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and 

Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 

Standard 16–69, ‘‘Method of Testing for 

Rating Room Air Conditioners.’’ 4 The 

DOE test procedure includes provisions 

for determining the energy efficiency 

ratio (EER) of room air conditioners, 

which is the ratio of the cooling 

capacity in British thermal units (Btu) to 

the power input in watts (W). 

As currently drafted, the test 

procedures for the products at issue in 

this rulemaking generally do not 

account for standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption, except in one 

narrow product class. Specifically, for 

gas dryers with continuously burning 

pilot lights, DOE’s current test 

procedure for clothes dryers addresses 

the standby energy use of such pilot 

lights, but otherwise, neither this test 

procedure nor DOE’s test procedure for 

room air conditioners addresses energy 

use in the standby or off modes. 

The Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 5 (EISA 2007) 

amended EPCA, and in relevant part, 

directs DOE to amend its test 

procedures to include measures of 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption. The EISA 2007 

amendments to EPCA further direct 

DOE to amend the test procedures to 

integrate such energy consumption into 

a single energy descriptor for that 

product. If that is technically infeasible, 

DOE must prescribe a separate standby 

mode and off mode energy-use test 

procedure, if technically feasible. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) Any such 

amendment must consider the most 

current versions of the International 

Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 

Standard 62301 [‘‘Household electrical 

appliances–measurement of standby 

power,’’ First Edition 2005–06 (IEC 

Standard 62301)] 6 7 and IEC Standard 

62087 [‘‘Methods of measurement for the 

power consumption of audio, video, and 

related equipment,’’ Second Edition 

2008–09]. Id. For clothes dryers and 

room air conditioners, DOE must 

prescribe any such amendment to the 

test procedures by March 31, 2009. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(B)(ii)) 

The EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA 

also provide that amendments to the test 

procedures to include standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption will 

not determine compliance with 

previously established standards. 

(U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(C)) The test 

procedure amendments regarding 

provisions for standby mode and off 

mode would become effective, in terms 

of adoption into the CFR, 30 days after 

the date of publication in the Federal 

Register of the final rule in this test 

procedures rulemaking. However, DOE 

is proposing added language to the 

regulations codified in the CFR that 

would state that any added procedures 

and calculations for standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption resulting 

from EISA 2007 need not be performed 

at this time to determine compliance 

with the current energy conservation 

standards. Subsequently, manufacturers 

would be required to use the amended 

test procedures’ standby mode and off 

mode provisions to demonstrate 

compliance with DOE’s energy 

conservation standards on the effective 

date of a final rule establishing amended 

energy conservation standards for the 

products that address standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption, at which 

time the limiting statement in the DOE 

test procedure would be removed. 

Further clarification would also be 

provided that as of 180 days after 

publication of a test procedure final 

rule, any representations as to the 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption of the products that are 

the subject of this rulemaking would 

need to be based upon results generated 

under the applicable provisions of this 

test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) 

On October 9, 2007, DOE published a 

notice in the Federal Register 

announcing the availability of a 

framework document to initiate a 

rulemaking to consider amended energy 

conservation standards for residential 

clothes dryers and room air conditioners 

(hereafter the October 2007 Framework 

Document). 72 FR 57254. The issuance 

of a framework document is the first 

step in conducting an appliance 

standards rulemaking. In the October 

2007 Framework Document, DOE 

identified specific ways in which it 

could revise its test procedures for these 

two products and requested comment 

from interested parties on whether it 

should adopt such revisions. 

Specifically, DOE sought comment on 

potential amendments to the clothes 

dryer test procedure to: (1) Reflect lower 

remaining moisture content (RMC) 8 in 

clothes loads; (2) account for fewer 

annual use cycles; and (3) add the 

capability to test vent-less clothes 

dryers. (Framework Document, STD No. 

1 at pp. 4–6) 9 DOE also received 

comments in response to the October 

2007 Framework Document that it 

should consider changes to the dryer 

test load size. For room air conditioners, 

DOE requested input on potential 

amendments to the test procedure to: (1) 

Incorporate the most recent ANSI and 

ASHRAE test standards; (2) reduce the 

annual operating hours; and (3) measure 

part-load performance. (Framework 

Document, STD No. 1 at pp. 6–7) For 

room air conditioners, DOE also 

received comments in response to the 

October 2007 Framework Document that 

it should consider changes to the 

ambient test conditions. Because the 

October 2007 Framework Document was 

issued before the enactment of EISA 

2007, possible amendments identified at 

that time for the clothes dryer and room 

air conditioner test procedures did not 

address standby mode or off mode 

energy use. 

DOE published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NOPR) on December 9, 

2008 (December 2008 TP NOPR), in 

which it proposed a number of revisions 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37597 

10 61 FR 36974 (July 15, 1996) (establishing 10 

CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A). 

and additions to its test procedures for 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners, consisting largely of 

provisions to address the new statutory 

requirement to expand test procedures 

to incorporate a measure of standby 

mode and off mode energy 

consumption. 73 FR 74639. 

The NOPR was issued on December 2, 

2008, although it was formally 

published on December 9, 2008 (Id.), 

and the proposals in the NOPR were 

addressed at a public meeting on 

December 17, 2008 (December 2008 

Public Meeting). In addition, DOE 

invited written comments, data, and 

information on the December 2008 TP 

NOPR, and accepted such material 

through February 23, 2009. 

DOE received oral comments from 

interested parties at the December 2008 

Public Meeting and subsequently 

received four written comments. The 

principal test procedure issues on 

which interested parties commented 

were: (1) The establishment of multiple 

low power or standby modes for both 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners; (2) the number of annual 

hours associated with active, standby, 

and off modes for the calculation of 

energy use; (3) the consideration of an 

additional standby mode (a ‘‘network 

mode’’); (4) the potential clarification of 

the definitions of standby and off mode; 

(5) the harmonization of mode 

definitions and testing procedures with 

the rest of the world, in particular the 

consideration of IEC Standard 62301 

Second Edition, Committee Draft 2 (IEC 

Standard 62301 CD2); and (6) the 

potential integration of standby and off 

mode energy use and active mode 

energy use into a single energy-use 

metric. 

DOE determined after the December 

2008 TP NOPR was published that it 

would continue the clothes dryer and 

room air conditioner test procedure 

rulemaking to allow for consideration of 

a revised version of IEC Standard 62301, 

i.e., IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, 

which at that time was expected to be 

published in July 2009. DOE 

anticipated, based on review of drafts of 

the updated IEC Standard 62301, that 

the revisions could include different 

mode definitions. DOE expected to 

publish a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) for the 

test procedure rulemaking in which the 

new mode definitions from the revised 

IEC Standard 62301 would be 

considered. However, more recently, 

DOE received information that IEC 

Standard 62301 Second Edition would 

not be published until late 2010, which 

would not be in time for the 

consideration of standby and off mode 

power consumption in the concurrent 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking. DOE, therefore, determined 

to publish today’s SNOPR to consider 

the new mode definitions from the most 

recent draft version of IEC Standard 

62301 Second Edition, designated as 

IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, 

Committee Draft for Vote (IEC Standard 

62301 CDV). DOE noted that the IEC 

first proposed revisions to IEC Standard 

62301 to develop IEC Standard 62301 

Second Edition by circulating IEC 

Standard 62301 Second Edition, 

Committee Draft 1 on November 16, 

2007. IEC subsequently revised the 

proposed amendments to IEC Standard 

62301 and circulated IEC Standard 

62301 CD2 on October 17, 2008. Most 

recently, the IEC again revised the 

proposed amendments and circulated 

IEC Standard 62301 CDV on August 28, 

2009. IEC Standard 62301 CDV contains 

the most recent proposed amendments 

to IEC Standard 62301, including new 

mode definitions. IEC Standard 62301 

CDV revised the proposed mode 

definitions from those proposed in the 

previous draft version IEC Standard 

62301 CD2 and addresses comments 

received by interested parties in 

response to IEC Standard 62301 CD2. 

DOE, therefore, believes that such new 

mode definitions represent the best 

definitions available for the analysis in 

support of today’s SNOPR. 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, 

DOE’s proposal was limited to 

amendments to its test procedures for 

clothes dryers and room air conditioners 

to include methods for measuring 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption. DOE determined after the 

December 2008 TP NOPR to conduct a 

rulemaking to address the active mode 

test procedure issues for clothes dryers 

and room air conditioners, including 

those on which it requested comment in 

the October 2007 Framework Document. 

Because DOE decided to continue the 

test procedure rulemaking concerning 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption, DOE intends to address in 

today’s SNOPR the balance of the test 

procedure issues relating to active mode 

for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. 

Any test procedure amendments 

regarding the active mode test 

provisions for clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners will become effective 

30 days after the date of publication in 

the Federal Register of the final rule in 

this test procedures rulemaking. 

However, as of 180 days after 

publication of a test procedure final 

rule, any representations with respect to 

the energy use or efficiency or cost of 

energy consumed of the products that 

are the subject of this rulemaking would 

need to be based upon results generated 

under the applicable provisions of these 

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

6293(c)(2)) 

This test procedure rulemaking is 

anticipated to support a concurrent 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking for residential clothes dryers 

and room air conditioners. For clothes 

dryers, the National Appliance Energy 

Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA), 

Public Law 100–12, amended EPCA to 

establish prescriptive standards for 

clothes dryers, requiring that gas dryers 

manufactured on or after January 1, 

1988 not be equipped with a constant 

burning pilot and further requiring that 

DOE conduct two cycles of rulemakings 

to determine if more stringent standards 

are justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(g)(3) and 

(4)) On May 14, 1991, DOE published a 

final rule in the Federal Register 

establishing the first set of performance 

standards for residential clothes dryers 

(56 FR 22250); the new standards 

became effective on May 14, 1994. 10 

CFR 430.32(h). DOE initiated a second 

standards rulemaking for residential 

clothes dryers by publishing an advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking (ANOPR) 

in the Federal Register on November 14, 

1994. 59 FR 56423. However, pursuant 

to the priority-setting process outlined 

in DOE’s ‘‘Procedures for Consideration 

of New or Revised Energy Conservation 

Standards for Consumer Products’’ (the 

‘‘Process Rule’’),10 DOE classified the 

clothes dryer standards rulemaking as a 

low priority for its fiscal year 1998 

priority-setting process. As a result, 

DOE suspended the standards 

rulemaking activities for them. DOE has 

since resumed the rulemaking activities, 

and has recently initiated the second 

cycle of clothes dryer standards 

rulemakings. 72 FR 57254 (October 9, 

2007). 

NAECA established performance 

standards for room air conditioners that 

became effective on January 1, 1990, 

and directed DOE to conduct two cycles 

of rulemakings to determine if more 

stringent standards are justified. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(c)(1) and (2)) On March 4, 

1994, DOE published a NOPR for 

several products, including room air 

conditioners. 59 FR 10464. Because of 

the Process Rule, DOE suspended 

activities to finalize standards for room 

air conditioners. DOE subsequently 

resumed rulemaking activities related to 

room air conditioners, and, on 

September 24, 1997, DOE published a 

final rule establishing an updated set of 

performance standards, with an 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37598 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

11EISA 2007 directs DOE to also consider IEC 

Standard 62087 when amending its test procedure 

to include standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption. See 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A). 

However, IEC Standard 62087 addresses the 

methods of measuring the power consumption of 

audio, video, and related equipment. As explained 

subsequently in this notice, the narrow scope of this 

particular IEC Standard reduces its relevance to 

today’s proposal. 

effective date of October 1, 2000. 62 FR 

50122; 10 CFR 40.32(b). Concurrent 

with the clothes dryer rulemaking, DOE 

has recently initiated the second cycle 

of room air conditioner standards 

rulemakings. 72 FR 57254. 

EISA 2007 includes amendments to 

EPCA that direct DOE to incorporate 

standby and off mode energy use into 

any final rule establishing or revising a 

standard for a covered product adopted 

after July 1, 2010. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) 

DOE anticipates publishing the next 

final rule revising efficiency standards 

for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners by June 30, 2011. Because 

publication of the final rule revising 

efficiency standards will fall after July 1, 

2010 (the date after which any final rule 

establishing or revising a standard must 

incorporate standby and off mode 

energy use), this final rule must 

incorporate standby and off mode 

energy use, thereby necessitating the 

adoption of relevant standby and off 

mode provisions into the test 

procedures for these products. 

This test procedure rulemaking will 

fulfill the seven-year review 

requirement prescribed by EISA 2007. 

At least once every 7 years, the 

Secretary shall review test procedures 

for all covered products and—amend 

test procedures with respect to any 

covered product or publish notice in the 

Federal Register of any determination 

not to amend a test procedure. (42 

U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A)) 

II. Summary of the Proposal 

In today’s SNOPR, DOE proposes to 

amend the test procedures for clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners in 

order to: (1) Provide a foundation for 

DOE to develop and implement energy 

conservation standards that address the 

energy use of these products when in 

standby mode and off mode; (2) address 

the statutory requirement to expand test 

procedures to incorporate measures of 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption; (3) adopt technical 

changes and procedures for more 

accurately measuring the effects of 

different automatic termination 

technologies in clothes dryers; (4) 

expand the clothes dryer test procedures 

to accommodate vent-less clothes dryers 

being considered for coverage under an 

amended energy conservation standard; 

(5) update detergent specifications for 

clothes dryer test cloth preconditioning; 

(6) adopt technical changes to better 

reflect current usage patterns and 

capabilities for the covered products; (7) 

update the references to external test 

procedures in the DOE room air 

conditioner and clothes dryer test 

procedure; and (8) clarify the test 

conditions for gas clothes dryers. The 

following paragraphs summarize these 

proposed changes. 

In amending the current test 

procedures, DOE proposed in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR to incorporate 

by reference into both the clothes dryer 

and room air conditioner test 

procedures specific clauses from IEC 

Standard 62301 regarding test 

conditions and test procedures for 

measuring standby mode and off mode 

power consumption. This proposal is 

not affected by this SNOPR, in which 

DOE proposes to incorporate into each 

test procedure the definitions of ‘‘active 

mode,’’ ‘‘standby mode,’’ and ‘‘off mode’’ 

that are based on the definitions 

provided in the latest draft version of 

IEC Standard 62301 Second Edition, 

designated as IEC Standard 62301 CDV. 

As discussed in section III.B.1, DOE 

believes that the new mode definitions 

contained in IEC Standard 62301 CDV 

represent a substantial improvement 

over those in IEC Standard 62301 and 

demonstrate significant participation of 

interested parties in the development of 

the best possible definitions. Further, 

DOE proposes to include in each test 

procedure additional language that 

would clarify the application of clauses 

from IEC Standard 62301 and the mode 

definitions from IEC Standard 62301 

CDV for measuring standby mode and 

off mode power consumption.11

For reasons discussed in section 

III.B.2 for clothes dryers, DOE is 

proposing in today’s SNOPR a 

definition and testing procedures for a 

single standby mode, rather than the 

multiple standby modes—a general 

‘‘inactive’’ mode, a ‘‘cycle finished’’ 

mode, and a ‘‘delay start’’ mode—that 

were proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 74645. DOE is also 

proposing to establish new methods to 

calculate clothes dryer standby mode 

and off mode energy use and to adopt 

a new measure of energy efficiency 

(Combined Energy Factor (CEF)) that 

includes energy use in the standby 

mode and off mode. The proposed 

amendments regarding standby mode 

and off mode would not change the 

method to calculate the existing clothes 

dryer energy efficiency metric for active 

mode only, which is the energy factor 

(EF). 

Similarly, for reasons discussed in 

section III.B.2 for room air conditioners, 

DOE is proposing in today’s SNOPR a 

definition and testing procedures for a 

single standby mode, rather than the 

multiple standby modes—a general 

‘‘inactive’’ mode, a ‘‘delay start’’ mode, 

and an ‘‘off-cycle’’ mode—as was 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 74645. In the 

December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE also 

proposed that standby mode and off 

mode testing be conducted with roomside air temperature at 74 ± 2 degrees 

Fahrenheit (°F), with a temperature 

control setting of 79 °F. 73 FR 74639, 

74646. However, upon further 

consideration, DOE determined that, 

because the proposed test procedure 

would be limited to the measurement of 

a single standby mode and an off mode, 

the proposed close tolerance on ambient 

temperature and the proposed 

temperature setting of 79 °F, which were 

relevant only for an off-cycle standby 

mode measurement, would not be 

required. Therefore, DOE is no longer 

proposing to include these requirements 

for testing conditions in today’s SNOPR. 

DOE is also proposing in today’s SNOPR 

new methods to calculate room air 

conditioner standby mode and off mode 

energy use and to adopt a new measure 

of energy efficiency (Combined Energy 

Efficiency Ratio (CEER)) that includes 

energy use in the standby mode and the 

off mode. The proposed amendments 

regarding standby mode and off mode 

would not change the method to 

calculate the existing room air 

conditioner energy efficiency metric for 

active mode only, which is the energy 

efficiency ratio (EER). 

Based upon comments from interested 

parties in response to the October 2007 

Framework Document and 

investigations of international test 

standards, DOE believes that the benefit 

of automatic cycle termination should 

be more accurately credited in its 

clothes dryer test procedure. Therefore, 

DOE proposes to revise this test 

procedure to include definitions of and 

provisions for testing both timer dryers 

and automatic termination control 

dryers using 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). AS/NZS Standard 2442 is an 

internationally accepted testing 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37599 

12U.S. Department of Energy—Energy 

Information Administration. ‘‘Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey,’’ 2005 Public Use Data Files, 

2005. Washington, DC. Available online at: http:// 

www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/. 

13EIA’s 2005 RECS is the latest available version 

of this survey. 

standard that provides testing methods 

to account for the over-drying energy 

consumption associated with both timer 

dryers and automatic termination 

control dryers. DOE has evaluated AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442 and determined that 

it provides an accurate testing 

methodology for measuring the energy 

consumption for both timer and 

automatic termination control dryers 

while also accounting for over-drying 

energy consumption. Therefore, DOE is 

proposing to incorporate the testing 

methods from these international test 

standards, along with a number of 

added clarifications, to measure the 

energy consumption for both timer 

dryers and automatic termination 

control dryers, accounting for the 

amount of over-drying energy 

consumption, i.e., the energy consumed 

by the clothes dryer after the load 

reaches an RMC of 5 percent. The 

proposed amendments would provide 

methods for timer dryers to measure the 

per-cycle energy consumption required 

to reach a final RMC of no more than 5 

percent, and continuing to apply the 

effective energy efficiency penalty for 

timer dryer over-drying energy 

consumption provided by the fixed field 

use (FU) factor in the current test 

procedure. For automatic termination 

control dryers, the dryer would be 

tested using an automatic termination 

setting, 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 RMC of no more than 5 percent. 

Any energy consumed once the RMC is 

less than 5 percent would be considered 

over-drying. Based on the proposed test 

methods, an automatic termination 

control dryer that is able to dry the test 

load to close to 5-percent RMC, and thus 

minimize over-drying, will show a 

higher efficiency than if that same dryer 

were to over-dry the test load to an RMC 

less than 5 percent. The energy 

consumed by over-drying the test load 

would be included in the per-cycle 

energy consumption, and would result 

in a reduction in the measured EF. 

As discussed in section III.C.3, DOE 

intends to analyze potential energy 

conservation standards for vent-less 

clothes dryers in a separate rulemaking. 

Therefore, provisions must be added to 

the DOE clothes dryer test procedure for 

measuring the energy efficiency 

performance in vent-less clothes dryers. 

DOE is proposing in today’s SNOPR to 

amend the current clothes dryer test 

procedure to include provisions for 

testing vent-less clothes dryers based 

upon the alternate test procedure that 

DOE previously presented in ‘‘Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products: Publication of the Petition for 

Waiver and Denial of the Application 

for Interim Waiver of LG Electronics 

from the Department of Energy Clothes 

Dryer Test Procedures.’’ (LG Petition for 

Waiver) 71 FR 49437 (Aug. 23, 2006). 

Further, DOE proposes to include in the 

test procedure additional language 

based upon provisions from European 

Standard EN 61121, ‘‘Tumble dryers for 

household use—Methods for measuring 

the performance,’’ Edition 3 2005 (EN 

Standard 61121) that would clarify the 

alternate test procedure presented in the 

LG Petition for Waiver. EN Standard 

61121 is an internationally accepted test 

standard that provides methods for 

testing vent-less clothes dryers. The 

clarifications would require that if a 

vent-less clothes dryer is equipped with 

a condensation box (which would store 

condensed moisture removed from the 

air exiting the drum until later manual 

removal by the user), the dryer would be 

tested with such condensation box 

installed as specified by the 

manufacturer. In addition, the 

clarifications would provide that if the 

clothes dryer stops the test cycle for the 

reason that the condensation box is full, 

the test would not be valid. The 

clarifications would also require that the 

condenser heat exchanger not be taken 

out of the dryer between tests. Finally, 

the proposed clarifications would 

address clothes dryer preconditioning 

for vent-less dryers. 

In addition, based upon comments 

from interested parties in response to 

the October 2007 Framework Document 

and data on consumer usage patterns, 

DOE is proposing to amend the DOE test 

procedure for clothes dryers to reflect 

current usage patterns and capabilities. 

DOE proposes to revise the number of 

annual use cycles from the 416 cycles 

per year currently specified by the DOE 

test procedure, to 283 cycles per year for 

all types (i.e., product classes) of clothes 

dryers based on data from the Energy 

Information Administration (EIA)’s 2005 

‘‘Residential Energy Consumption 

Survey’’ (RECS) 12 13 for the number of 

laundry loads (clothes washer cycles) 

washed per week and the frequency of 

clothes dryer use. DOE is also proposing 

to revise the 70-percent initial RMC 

required by the test procedure to 47 

percent to accurately represent the 

current condition of laundry loads after 

a wash cycle, based on shipmentweighted RMC data for clothes washers 

submitted by the Association of Home 

Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) and 

based on a distribution of RMC values 

for clothes washer models listed in the 

December 22, 2008, California Energy 

Commission (CEC) directory. In 

addition, DOE is proposing to change 

the 7-pound (lb) clothes dryer test load 

size specified by the current test 

procedure for standard-size clothes 

dryers to 8.45 lb, based on the historical 

trends of clothes washer tub volumes 

and the corresponding percentage 

increase in clothes washer test load 

sizes (as specified by the DOE clothes 

washer test procedure), which is 

assumed to proportionally impact dryer 

load sizes. DOE believes most compact 

clothes dryers are used in conjunction 

with compact-size clothes washers, and 

DOE does not have any information to 

suggest that the tub volume of such 

clothes washers has changed 

significantly. Therefore, DOE is not 

proposing to change the 3-lb test load 

size currently specified in its clothes 

dryer test procedure for compact clothes 

dryers. 

For clothes dryers, DOE is also 

proposing to revise the detergent 

specifications for test cloth 

preconditioning due to obsolescence of 

the detergent specified in the test 

procedure, to eliminate an unnecessary 

reference to an obsolete industry clothes 

dryer test standard, and to amend the 

provisions in its test procedure which 

specify test conditions for gas clothes 

dryers to clarify the required gas supply 

pressure. 

For room air conditioners, based upon 

comments received on the October 2007 

Framework Document, DOE is 

proposing to update the references in its 

current room air conditioner test 

procedure to incorporate the most 

recent ANSI and ASHRAE test 

standards—ANSI/AHAM RAC–1– 

R2008, ‘‘Room Air Conditioners,’’ 

(ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008) and 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 

2009) ‘‘Method of Testing for Rating 

Room Air Conditioners and Packaged 

Terminal Air Conditioners’’ (ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009)). 

DOE has also determined that the 750 

annual operating hours specified by the 

current DOE test procedure is 

representative of current usage patterns, 

based upon its interpretation of data 

from the 2005 RECS and, therefore, is 

not proposing to amend the annual 

usage hours specified by the current 

DOE test procedure for room air 

conditioners. 

As noted above in section I, EPCA 

requires that DOE must determine ‘‘to 

what extent, if any, the proposed test 

procedure would alter the measured 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37600 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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 

during the rulemaking carried out with 

respect to such test procedure. 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. (42 U.S.C. 

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

6295(gg)(2)(C), EPCA provides that 

amendments to the test procedures to 

include standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption will not determine 

compliance with previously established 

standards. (U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(C)) 

These amended clothes dryer and 

room air conditioner test procedures 

would become effective, in terms of 

adoption into the CFR, 30 days after the 

date of publication in the Federal 

Register of the final rule in this test 

procedures rulemaking. Because the 

proposed amendments to the test 

procedures for measuring standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption 

would not alter the existing measures of 

energy consumption or efficiency for 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners, the proposed amendments 

would not affect a manufacturer’s ability 

to comply with current energy 

conservation standards. Manufacturers 

would not be required to use the 

amended test procedures’ standby mode 

and off mode provisions until the 

mandatory compliance date of amended 

clothes dryer and room air conditioner 

energy conservation standards. All 

representations related to standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption of 

both clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners made 180 days after the 

date of publication of the test 

procedures final rule in the Federal 

Register and before the compliance date 

of amended energy conservation 

standards must be based upon the 

standby and off mode requirements of 

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

6293(c)(2)) 

Furthermore, DOE has investigated 

how each of the proposed amendments 

to the active mode provisions in its 

clothes dryer and room air conditioner 

test procedures in today’s SNOPR 

would affect the measured efficiency of 

products. DOE has addressed this 

requirement for each of the proposed 

amendments individually in section 

III.C. 

III. Discussion 

A. Products Covered by the Test 

Procedure Changes 

Today’s proposed amendments to 

DOE’s clothes dryer test procedure 

cover both electric clothes dryers, which 

DOE’s regulations define to mean a 

cabinet-like appliance designed to dry 

fabrics in a tumble-type drum with 

forced air circulation. The heat source is 

electricity and the drum and blower(s) 

are driven by an electric motor(s). The 

amendments also address gas clothes 

dryers, which DOE defines to mean a 

cabinet-like appliance designed to dry 

fabrics in a tumble-type drum with 

forced air circulation. The heat source is 

gas and the drum and blower(s) are 

driven by an electric motor(s). 

These definitions and the proposed 

amendments discussed below cover 

both vented and vent-less clothes 

dryers, as well as combination washer/ 

dryers. 

Today’s proposed amendments, to 

DOE’s room air conditioner test 

procedure, cover a consumer product, 

other than a ‘‘packaged terminal air 

conditioner,’’ which is powered by a 

single-phase electric current and which 

is an encased assembly designed as a 

unit for mounting in a window or 

through the wall for the purpose of 

providing delivery of conditioned air to 

an enclosed space. It includes a prime 

source of refrigeration and may include 

a means for ventilating and heating. 

This definition and the proposed 

amendments discussed below cover 

room air conditioners designed for 

single- or double-hung windows with or 

without louvered sides and with or 

without reverse cycle, as well as 

casement-slider and casement-only 

window-type room air conditioners. 

DOE is not proposing in today’s 

SNOPR to change the definitions for 

clothes dryers and room air conditioners 

in DOE’s regulations. 

B. Clothes Dryer and Room Air 

Conditioner Standby Mode and Off 

Mode Test Procedures 

1. Incorporating by Reference IEC 

Standard 62301 for Measuring Standby 

Mode and Off Mode Power in Clothes 

Dryers and Room Air Conditioners 

As noted in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR, DOE considered, pursuant to 

EPCA, the most current versions of IEC 

Standard 62301 and IEC Standard 62087 

for measuring power consumption in 

standby mode and off mode. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(A)) 73 FR 74639, 74643–44 

(Dec. 9, 2008). DOE noted that IEC 

Standard 62087 specifies methods of 

measuring the power consumption of 

TV receivers, videocassette recorders 

(VCRs), set top boxes, audio equipment, 

and multi-function equipment for 

consumer use. IEC Standard 62087 does 

not include measurement for the power 

consumption of electrical appliances 

such as clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. Therefore, DOE has 

tentatively determined that IEC 

Standard 62087 was unsuitable for 

potential amendments to the clothes 

dryer and room air conditioner test 

procedures. 73 FR 74639, 74643 (Dec. 9, 

2008). DOE noted that IEC Standard 

62301 provides for measuring standby 

power in electrical appliances, 

including clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners, and, thus, is applicable to 

the proposed amendments to the clothes 

dryer and room air conditioner test 

procedures. 73 FR 74643–44 (Dec. 9, 

2008). 

DOE proposed in the December 2008 

TP NOPR to incorporate by reference 

into the DOE test procedures for clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners 

specific clauses from IEC Standard 

62301 for measuring standby mode and 

off mode power: From section 4 

(‘‘General conditions for 

measurements’’), paragraph 4.2, ‘‘Test 

room,’’ paragraph 4.4, ‘‘Supply voltage 

waveform,’’ and paragraph 4.5, ‘‘Power 

measurement accuracy,’’ and section 5 

(‘‘Measurements’’), paragraph 5.1, 

‘‘General’’ and paragraph 5.3, 

‘‘Procedure.’’ DOE also proposed to 

reference these same provisions in the 

DOE test procedure for room air 

conditioners, as well as section 4, 

paragraph 4.3, ‘‘Power supply.’’ 73 FR 

74639, 74644 (Dec. 9, 2008). 

DOE noted in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR that the EPCA requirement to 

consider IEC Standard 62301 in 

developing amended test procedures for 

clothes dryers and room air conditioners 

presented a potential conflict in 

defining ‘‘standby mode.’’ 73 FR 74639, 

74644 (Dec. 9, 2008). EPCA defines 

‘‘standby mode’’ as the condition in 

which a product is connected to a main 

power source and offers one or more of 

the following user-oriented or protective 

functions: (1) To facilitate the activation 

or deactivation of other functions 

(including active mode) by remote 

switch (including remote control), 

internal sensor, or timer; and/or (2) to 

provide continuous functions, including 

information or status displays 

(including clocks) or sensor-based 

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

In contrast, paragraph 3.1 of IEC 

Standard 62301 defines ‘‘standby mode’’ 

as the ‘‘lowest power consumption mode 

which cannot be switched off 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37601 

14A notation in the form ‘‘AHAM, TP No. 10 at 

p. 2’’ identifies a written comment (1) made by 

AHAM; (2) recorded in document number 10 that 

is filed in the docket of this test procedures 

rulemaking (Docket No. EERE–2008–BT–TP–0010) 

and maintained in the Resource Room of the 

Building Technologies Program; and (3) which 

appears on page 2 of document number 10. 

15A notation in the form ‘‘AHAM, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 17, 29–35, 39–40’’ 

identifies an oral comment that DOE received 

during the December 17, 2008, NOPR public 

meeting, was recorded in the public meeting 

transcript in the docket for this test procedure 

rulemaking (Docket No. EERE–2008–BT–TP–0010), 

and is maintained in the Resource Room of the 

Building Technologies Program. This particular 

notation refers to a comment (1) made by AHAM 

during the public meeting; (2) recorded in 

document number 8, which is the public meeting 

transcript that is filed in the docket of this test 

procedure rulemaking; and (3) which appears on 

pages 17, 29–35, and 39–40 of document number 

8. 

(influenced) by the user and that may 

persist for an indefinite time when an 

appliance is connected to the main 

electricity supply and used in 

accordance with the manufacturer’s 

instructions.’’ In addition, prior to EISA 

2007, DOE adopted a definition for 

‘‘standby mode’’ nearly identical to that 

of IEC Standard 62301 in the 

dishwasher test procedure, in which 

‘‘standby mode’’ ‘‘means the lowest 

power consumption mode which cannot 

be switched off or influenced by the 

user and that may persist for an 

indefinite time when an appliance is 

connected to the main electricity supply 

and used in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s instructions.’’ (10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix C, section 

1.14) While EPCA specifies that DOE 

may amend the definitions provided 

under 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A), taking 

into consideration the most current 

version of IEC Standard 62301 in 

updating its test procedure (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(1)(B)), DOE proposed in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR to adopt the 

broader, statutory definition of ‘‘standby 

mode’’ provided in EPCA for reasons of 

greater specificity and clarity among the 

considered definitions, and to include 

that definition in the test procedures for 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. 73 FR 74639, 74644 (Dec. 

9, 2008) 

AHAM commented that the definition 

provided under EPCA, developed in 

part using IEC Standard 62301 Second 

Edition, Committee Draft 1, allowed the 

introduction and definition of ‘‘off 

mode’’ and it provided additional 

clarification on standby mode, which is 

not addressed in IEC Standard 62301. 

(AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 2) 14 AHAM 

also submitted comments to DOE, 

which AHAM denoted as general 

application guidelines, to individual 

appliance committees on the use of IEC 

Standard 62301 definitions. AHAM 

stated that the energy mode definitions 

in its comment are consistent with IEC 

Standard 62301 and EISA 2007. 

(AHAM, TP No. 12 at p. 1) For standby 

mode, AHAM’s submission states that 

this mode may persist for an indefinite 

period of time and may allow activation 

of other modes by local or remote 

switch. AHAM’s description of standby 

mode further specifies that standby 

mode applies only to products that are 

not ‘‘continuous run’’ products, which it 

defines as a product which ‘‘is 

performing in active mode 100 [percent] 

of time that it is plugged into the main 

electricity supply.’’ (AHAM, TP No. 12 

at p. 2). DOE notes that neither clothes 

dryers nor room air conditioners would 

be classified as continuous run 

products, since both provide modes in 

which the unit would be plugged in but 

not operating in active mode. For the 

reasons discussed below, DOE is 

revising the test procedure amendments 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR and is proposing in today’s 

SNOPR mode definitions based on the 

definitions provided in IEC Standard 

62301 CDV. As discussed further in 

section III.B.3 of this SNOPR, DOE also 

continues to propose the requirement it 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR that for clothes dryers or room air 

conditioners that drop from a higherpower state to a lower-power state, as 

discussed in Section 5, Paragraph 5.1, 

note 1 of IEC Standard 62301, sufficient 

time would be allowed for the unit to 

reach the lower-power state before 

proceeding with the test measurement 

for standby mode and off mode power. 

73 FR 74639, 74656, 74658 (Dec. 9, 

2008). 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

noted that, while section 325(gg)(2)(A) 

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

requires that the amended test 

procedures consider the most current 

version of IEC Standard 62301, the IEC 

is developing an updated version of this 

standard, IEC Standard 62301 Second 

Edition. 73 FR 74639, 74644 (Dec. 9, 

2008). This updated version of IEC 

Standard 62301 is expected to include 

definitions of ‘‘off mode,’’ ‘‘network 

mode,’’ and ‘‘disconnected mode,’’ and 

would revise the current IEC Standard 

62301 definition of ‘‘standby mode.’’ 

However, DOE stated in the December 

2008 TP NOPR that, because the IEC 

anticipated that this new version of 

Standard 62301 would likely be 

published in July 2009, this later 

version of the standard would be 

unavailable in time for DOE to consider 

it and to still meet the EISA 2007 

deadline for issuance of a final rule 

amending the relevant test procedure to 

include measures of standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption by March 

31, 2009. Id. See 42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(B)(ii). For this reason, DOE 

stated in the December 2008 TP NOPR 

that IEC Standard 62301 would be the 

‘‘current version’’ at the time of 

publication of the final rule, so 

consideration thereof would comply 

with EPCA. Accordingly, DOE 

incorporated sections from IEC Standard 

62301 in the proposed amendments to 

the test procedure in the December 2008 

TP NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 74644 (Dec. 9, 

2008). DOE also stated in the December 

2008 TP NOPR that after the final rule 

is published, amendments to the 

referenced standards would be adopted 

into the DOE test procedure only if DOE 

later publishes a final rule to 

incorporate them into its procedures. 73 

FR 74644 (Dec. 9, 2008). 

AHAM commented that a primary 

concern is the significant differences 

between IEC Standard 62301 and IEC 

Standard 62301 CD2. (AHAM, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 17) 15

AHAM supports the use of IEC Standard 

62301; however, it also stated that there 

have been considerable issues and 

concerns with the current version, 

including confusion over how to 

interpret the standard. AHAM noted 

that IEC Standard 62301 CD2 provides 

clarifications to IEC Standard 62301, 

such as further defining standby and off 

mode to allow for the measurement of 

multiple standby power modes. 

However, AHAM also noted that the 

procedures for setup and testing remain 

very much the same. (AHAM, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 29– 

31, 39–40) AHAM questioned whether 

the clarifications of IEC Standard 62301 

CD2, particularly in terms of these mode 

definitions, could be incorporated into 

the language in the DOE test procedure 

if DOE is unable to incorporate the 

standard directly, and proposed that 

DOE consider harmonizing with the IEC 

Standard 62301 CD2 under the 

expectation that this language will be 

finalized in IEC Standard 62301 Second 

Edition. AHAM believes that EISA 2007 

could be interpreted to allow IEC 

Standard 62301 CD2 to be incorporated 

before it is finalized. (AHAM, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 31– 

35) Whirlpool Corporation (Whirlpool) 

and GE Consumer & Industrial (GE) 

supported AHAMs comments that DOE 

should harmonize with the rest of the 

world in considering IEC Standard 

62301 CD2. (AHAM, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 17; Whirlpool, 

Public Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at 

p. 36; GE, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37602 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

16 DOE notes that some features that provide 

consumer utility, such as displays and remote 

controls, are associated with standby mode and not 

off mode. A clothes dryer or room air conditioner 

is considered to be in ‘‘off mode’’ if it is plugged 

in to a main power source, is not being used for an 

active function such as drying clothing or providing 

cooling, and is consuming power for features other 

than a display, controls (including a remote 

control), or sensors required to reactivate it from a 

low power state. For example, a clothes dryer with 

mechanical controls and no display or 

continuously-energized moisture sensor, but that 

consumed power for components such as a power 

supply when the unit was not activated, would be 

considered to be in off mode when not providing 

an active function. For room air conditioners, a unit 

with mechanical controls and no display or remote 

control but with a power supply that is consuming 

energy, for example, could be considered to be in 

off mode while not providing an active function. 

No. 8 at pp. 35–36) Pacific Gas & 

Electric (PG&E) stated that it supports 

harmonization, but does not support 

any significant delays in this 

rulemaking. (PG&E, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 35) 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

anticipated, based on review of draft 

versions of IEC Standard 62301 Second 

Edition, that the revisions to IEC 

Standard 62301 could include different 

mode definitions. As discussed in 

section I, DOE thus determined to 

publish an SNOPR for the test 

procedure rulemaking in which the new 

mode definitions from the IEC Standard 

62301 Second Edition, expected in July 

2009, would be considered. However, 

more recently, DOE received 

information that IEC Standard 62301 

Second Edition would not be available 

until late 2010. Because the final 

version of IEC Standard 62301 Second 

Edition would not be published in time 

for the consideration of standby and off 

mode power consumption in the 

concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking, DOE, therefore, 

determined to consider the new mode 

definitions from the draft version IEC 

Standard 62301 CDV. Based on DOE’s 

review of IEC Standard 62301 CDV, 

DOE believes the definitions of standby 

mode, off mode, and active mode 

provided in IEC Standard 62301 CDV 

expand upon the EPCA mode 

definitions and provide additional 

guidance as to which functions are 

associated with each mode. DOE also 

believes that the comments received by 

IEC on IEC Standard 62301 CD2, and the 

resulting amended mode definitions 

proposed in IEC Standard 62301 CDV, 

demonstrate significant participation of 

interested parties in the development of 

the best possible definitions. For these 

reasons, DOE is proposing in today’s 

SNOPR definitions of standby mode, off 

mode, and active mode based on the 

definitions provided in IEC Standard 

62301 CDV. These definitions are 

discussed in detail in Section III.B.2. 

DOE is narrowly considering such 

language from IEC Standard 62301 CDV, 

even though this is not a finalized test 

standard, because of the consensus 

among comments received, and DOE’s 

corroborating belief, that the mode 

definitions in the draft versions of IEC 

Standard 62301 Second Edition 

represent a substantial improvement 

over those in IEC Standard 62301. 

DOE did not receive any comments in 

response to the December 2008 TP 

NOPR objecting to the proposed testing 

methods and procedures referenced in 

IEC Standard 62301. As noted above, 

IEC Standard 62301 will be the ‘‘current 

version’’ at the time of publication of the 

final rule, so consideration thereof will 

comply with EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(A)) For these reasons, this 

SNOPR does not affect DOE’s proposal 

in the December 2008 TP NOPR to 

incorporate by reference the clauses 

presented above from IEC Standard 

62301. 

2. Determination of Modes To Be 

Incorporated 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to incorporate into the clothes 

dryer and room air conditioner test 

procedure the definitions of ‘‘active 

mode,’’ ‘‘standby mode,’’ and ‘‘off mode’’ 

specified by EPCA. 73 FR 74639, 74644 

(Dec. 9, 2008) EPCA defines ‘‘active 

mode’’ as ‘‘the condition in which an 

energy-using product— 

(I) Is connected to a main power 

source; 

(II) Has been activated; and 

(III) Provides 1 or more main 

functions.’’ 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)(i)) 

EPCA defines ‘‘standby mode’’ as ‘‘the 

condition in which an energy-using 

product— 

(I) Is connected to a main power 

source; and 

(II) Offers 1 or more of the following 

user-oriented or protective functions: 

(aa) To facilitate the activation or 

deactivation of other functions 

(including active mode) by remote 

switch (including remote control), 

internal sensor, or timer. 

(bb) Continuous functions, including 

information or status displays 

(including clocks) or sensor-based 

functions.’’ 

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

definition differs from the one provided 

in IEC Standard 62301 by permitting the 

inclusion of multiple standby modes. 

EPCA defines ‘‘off mode’’ as ‘‘the 

condition in which an energy-using 

product— 

(I) Is connected to a main power 

source; and 

(II) Is not providing any standby mode 

or active mode function.’’ 16

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

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

recognized that these definitions for 

‘‘active mode,’’ ‘‘standby mode,’’ and ‘‘off 

mode’’ were developed to be broadly 

applicable for many energy-using 

products. For specific products with 

multiple functions, these broad 

definitions could lead to unintended 

consequences if the meaning of ‘‘main 

functions’’ is narrowly interpreted. 73 

FR 74639, 74644–45 (Dec. 9, 2008). To 

address this problem, DOE proposed in 

the December 2008 TP NOPR to amend 

the clothes dryer and room air 

conditioner test procedures to clarify 

the range of main functions that would 

be classified as active mode functions 

and establish standby and off mode 

definitions as follows. 73 FR 74639, 

74645, 74645 (Dec. 9, 2008) 

DOE proposed the following mode 

definitions for clothes dryers in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR: 

‘‘Active mode’’ means a mode in which the 

clothes dryer is performing the main function 

of tumbling the clothing with or without 

heated or unheated forced air circulation to 

remove moisture from the clothing and/or 

remove or prevent wrinkling of the clothing; 

‘‘Inactive mode’’ means a standby mode 

other than delay start mode or cycle finished 

mode that facilitates the activation of active 

mode by remote switch (including remote 

control), internal sensor, or timer, or provides 

continuous status display; 

‘‘Cycle finished mode’’ means a standby 

mode that provides continuous status display 

following operation in active mode; 

‘‘Delay start mode’’ means a standby mode 

that facilitates the activation of active mode 

by timer; and 

‘‘Off mode’’ means a mode in which the 

clothes dryer is not performing any active or 

standby function. 73 FR 74639, 74645 (Dec. 

9, 2008). 

For room air conditioners, DOE 

proposed the following mode 

definitions in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR: 

‘‘Active mode’’ means a mode in which the 

room air conditioner is performing the main 

function of cooling or heating the 

conditioned space, or circulating air through 

activation of its fan or blower, with or 

without energizing active air-cleaning 

components or devices such as ultraviolet 

(UV) radiation, electrostatic filters, ozone 

generators, or other air-cleaning devices; 

‘‘Inactive mode’’ means a standby mode 

other than delay start mode or off-cycle mode 

that facilitates the activation of active mode 

by remote switch (including remote control) 

or internal sensor or provides continuous 

status display; 

‘‘Delay start mode’’ means a standby mode 

in which activation of an active mode is 

facilitated by a timer; 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37603 

17 ‘‘Compilation of comments on 59/523/CD: IEC 

62301 Ed 2.0: Household electrical appliances— 

Measurement of standby power.’’ August 7, 2009. p. 

6. IEC Standards are available online at http:// 

www.iec.ch. 

‘‘Off-cycle mode’’ means a standby mode in 

which the room air conditioner: (1) Has 

cycled off its main function by thermostat or 

temperature sensor; (2) does not have its fan 

or blower operating; and (3) will reactivate 

the main function according to the 

thermostat or temperature sensor signal; and 

‘‘Off mode’’ means a mode in which a room 

air conditioner is not performing any active 

or standby function. 73 FR 74639, 74645 

(Dec. 9, 2008). 

DOE received numerous comments 

from interested parties on the standby 

and off mode definitions. DOE did not 

receive any comments objecting to the 

proposed definitions of active mode for 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. As discussed in the 

following paragraphs regarding standby 

mode definitions, DOE did receive 

comments stating that certain modes 

that it had proposed as standby modes 

should be considered as part of active 

mode. In addition, AHAM’s comments 

reiterated the definition of active mode 

in general as provided by EISA 2007 

and stated that this definition is 

consistent with the energy mode 

definition in IEC Standard 62301. 

AHAM’s comments also state, however, 

that when a product is not in off mode 

or standby mode, it is in active mode. 

(AHAM, TP No. 12 at p. 1) Such a 

definition is inconsistent with the 

EPCA, IEC Standard 62301 CD2, and 

IEC Standard 62301 CDV mode 

definitions, in which off mode is 

defined as providing no standby or 

active mode function. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(1)(A)(ii)) 

As to the active mode, as discussed in 

section III.B.1, DOE is proposing in 

today’s SNOPR to amend the DOE 

clothes dryer and room air conditioner 

test procedures to define active mode as 

a mode which ‘‘includes product modes 

where the energy using product is 

connected to a main power source, has 

been activated and provides one or more 

main functions.’’ 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix D1, proposed 

section 1.1 and appendix F, proposed 

section 1.1. The proposed definition of 

active mode is the same as the 

definition proposed for the December 

2008 TP NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 74644 

(Dec. 9, 2008). DOE notes that IEC 

Standard 62301 CD2 provided 

additional clarification that ‘‘delay start 

mode is a one off user initiated short 

duration function that is associated with 

an active mode.’’ (IEC Standard 62301 

CD2, section 3.8) IEC Standard 62301 

CDV removed this clarification; 

however, in response to comments on 

IEC Standard 62301 CD2 that led to IEC 

Standard 62301 CDV, IEC states that 

delay start mode is a one off function of 

limited duration.17 DOE infers this to 

mean that delay start mode would not 

be considered a standby mode, although 

no conclusion is made as to whether it 

would be considered part of active 

mode. 

DOE is also proposing the additional 

clarifications discussed above for the 

range of main functions that would be 

classified as active mode functions, 

which were proposed in the December 

2008 TP NOPR. For clothes dryers, DOE 

is proposing that the main function 

consist of tumbling the clothing with or 

without heated or unheated forced air 

circulation to remove moisture from the 

clothing and/or remove or prevent 

wrinkling of the clothing. 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D1, proposed 

section 1.1. For room air conditioners, 

DOE is proposing that the main function 

consist of cooling or heating the 

conditioned space, or circulating air 

through activation of its fan or blower, 

with or without energizing active aircleaning components or devices such as 

ultraviolet (UV) radiation, electrostatic 

filters, ozone generators, or other aircleaning devices. 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix F, proposed section 

1.1. DOE believes this proposed 

definition of active mode provides 

sufficient specificity for room air 

conditioners. 

For clothes dryers, DOE additionally 

investigated whether certain operating 

cycles providing a steam function 

should be covered under active mode, 

and whether measurement of energy 

consumption for such cycles should be 

incorporated into the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure. Based on its research 

and discussions with manufacturers, 

DOE believes that the general purpose of 

steam in a clothes dryer cycle is to 

soften the clothing load to ease 

wrinkles, sanitize clothes, eliminate 

static electrical charge, and/or help 

remove odors. As part of its reverse 

engineering analyses conducted for the 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking for residential clothes 

dryers, DOE observed that the steam 

may be generated by spraying a fine 

mist of water into the heated drum, 

allowing the hot clothing load to 

evaporate the water, or the steam may 

be produced in a generator outside the 

drum before injecting it in with the 

clothes load. Most steam-equipped 

clothes dryers require a hookup to the 

cold water line that would supply water 

to an adjacent clothes washer. On 

certain models, however, the clothes 

dryer contains a user-fillable water 

reservoir. Steam functions typically are 

programmed as unique operating cycles, 

although manufacturers may provide 

the option to add steam during a 

conventional drying cycle or to 

periodically tumble and inject steam 

over a certain amount of time at the end 

of a conventional drying cycle to 

prevent wrinkling. 

The current DOE test procedure does 

not contain any provisions that would 

account for the energy and water use of 

such steam cycles. Based on a 

preliminary market survey of products 

available on the market, DOE’s estimates 

suggest that, at this time, steam cycles 

represent a very small fraction of overall 

product use on a nationwide basis. DOE 

is unaware of energy and water 

consumption or consumer usage data 

with respect to steam. For these reasons, 

DOE is not proposing amendments to 

include measurement of steam cycles 

for clothes dryers. 

DOE received multiple comments 

regarding the proposed definition and 

clarifications for standby modes. AHAM 

opposed the establishment of multiple 

low power or standby modes for both 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. AHAM stated that ‘‘delay 

start’’ and ‘‘cycle finished’’ modes for 

clothes dryers and ‘‘delay start’’ and ‘‘offcycle’’ modes for room air conditioners 

should not be defined as standby 

modes, because in each case the product 

is not operating at its lowest power 

state. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at pp. 2–4) 

AHAM stated that the delay start 

function is associated with an active 

cycle, requires input by the consumer, 

and persists for a defined time. AHAM 

further stated that the cycle finished 

mode for clothes dryers and the offcycle mode for room air conditioners are 

modes of limited duration that are 

associated with an active cycle, wherein 

the product is not operating at its lowest 

power state. According to AHAM, this 

condition is in conflict with the IEC 

Standard 62301 definition that standby 

mode ‘‘* * * may persist for an 

indefinite time * * *’’ (AHAM, TP No. 

10 at pp. 2–3) For these reasons, AHAM 

commented that delay start mode for 

both products, cycle finished mode for 

clothes dryers, and off-cycle mode for 

room air conditioners should be 

incorporated into active mode, or that a 

standard empirical value should be 

added to all active energy measurements 

to represent the energy use of these lowpower modes. Id. AHAM also noted 

that, for room air conditioners, delay 

start mode and off-cycle mode are 

energy-saving features which, in an 

integrated energy-use metric combining 

the energy use of these modes with 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37604 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

18The actual language for the standby mode 

definition in IEC Standard 62301 CDV describes 

‘‘* * * user oriented or protective functions which 

usually persist’’ rather than ‘‘* * * user oriented or 

protective functions which may persist for an 

indefinite time.’’ DOE notes, however, that section 

5.1 of IEC Standard 62301 CDV states that ‘‘a mode 

is considered persistent where the power level is 

constant or where there are several power levels 

that occur in a regular sequence for an indefinite 

period of time.’’ DOE believes that the proposed 

language, which was originally included in IEC 

Standard 62301 CD2, encompasses the possible 

scenarios foreseen by section 5.1 of IEC Standard 

62301 CDV without unnecessary specificity. 

energy use in active mode, result in 

lower-efficiency units that don’t have 

such features appearing to be more 

efficient than units with these energysaving features. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 

4) 

GE adopted by reference AHAM’s 

comments on the definitions of multiple 

standby modes. (GE, TP No. 11 at p. 1) 

Whirlpool also opposed defining 

multiple active and standby modes 

because doing so would add complexity 

to the test procedure without adding 

value to the measurements. Whirlpool 

agreed with AHAM and GE that delay 

start and cycle finished modes, which 

are user-initiated primary functions of 

the product, are part of active mode 

rather than separate standby modes. 

(Whirlpool, TP No. 9 at p. 2) PG&E 

added that it is confusing to consider as 

an off-cycle mode the state in which the 

thermostat has cycled off the fan and 

compressor. PG&E stated that this state 

should be considered part of the active 

mode. (PG&E, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 84–85) 

As discussed in section III.B.1, DOE is 

proposing in today’s SNOPR to amend 

the DOE test procedure for clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners to 

define standby mode based on the 

definitions provided in IEC Standard 

62301 CDV. DOE proposes to define 

standby mode as a mode which 

‘‘includes any product modes where the 

energy using product is connected to a 

main power source and offers one or 

more of the following user oriented or 

protective functions which may persist 

for an indefinite time: 18

• To facilitate the activation of other 

modes (including activation or 

deactivation of active mode) by remote 

switch (including remote control), 

internal sensor, timer; 

• Continuous function: Information 

or status displays including clocks; 

• Continuous function: Sensor-based 

functions.’’ 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix D1, proposed section 1.19 and 

appendix F, proposed section 1.5. 

DOE is proposing an additional 

clarification that ‘‘a timer is a 

continuous clock function (which may 

or may not be associated with a display) 

that provides regular scheduled tasks 

(e.g., switching) and that operates on a 

continuous basis.’’ Id. This definition 

was developed based on the definitions 

provided in IEC Standard 62301 CDV, 

and expands upon the EPCA mode 

definitions to provide additional 

clarifications as to which functions are 

associated with each mode. 

Based on these proposed definitions, 

delay start mode and cycle-finished 

mode for clothes dryers and delay start 

mode and off-cycle mode for room air 

conditioners are not modes that persist 

for an indefinite time, and would 

therefore not be considered as part of a 

standby mode. DOE’s analysis of annual 

energy use in specific clothes dryer and 

room air conditioner modes—presented 

in the December 2008 TP NOPR— 

determined that delay start mode and 

cycle-finished mode for clothes dryers, 

and delay start mode and off-cycle mode 

for room air conditioners, each 

represent a negligible portion (0.1 

percent or less) of the annual energy use 

for the particular product. 73 FR 74639, 

74647, 74649 (Dec. 9, 2008). Therefore, 

an integrated energy efficiency metric 

for either clothes dryers or room air 

conditioners would not be measurably 

affected by either the inclusion or 

exclusion of the energy use in any of 

these modes. Further, DOE believes that 

the benefit of incorporating the energy 

use of these modes into the overall 

energy efficiency (i.e., providing greater 

specificity in the evaluation of methods 

for reducing energy consumption and 

the potential for energy savings for the 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking) is outweighed by the 

burden that would be placed on the 

manufacturers to measure power 

consumption in each of these modes. 

For these reasons, DOE is not proposing 

amendments to the test procedures to 

define delay start, cycle finished, and 

off-cycle modes or to measure power 

consumption in delay start mode for 

either product, cycle finished mode for 

clothes dryers, and off-cycle mode for 

room air conditioners in today’s 

SNOPR. DOE is only including in the 

proposed clothes dryer and room air 

conditioner test procedures 

amendments in this SNOPR provisions 

for measuring energy consumption in 

the inactive mode and off mode. 

AHAM commented that the term 

‘‘inactive mode’’ should be changed to 

‘‘standby mode’’ for simplicity and to 

remain consistent in the use of this 

term. In addition, AHAM stated that 

DOE should define standby mode as 

‘‘the lowest power consumption mode 

which cannot be switched off or 

influenced by the user’’ (i.e., not 

performing any function, but ready to 

perform a function) to be consistent 

with IEC Standard 62301. (AHAM, TP 

No. 10 at pp. 2–3) The comments which 

AHAM subsequently submitted to DOE 

clarified AHAM’s suggested definition 

by stating that standby mode should be 

defined as ‘‘the lowest-power 

consumption mode when the appliance 

is connected to the main electricity 

supply and is used in accordance with 

the manufacturer’s instructions. 

Standby mode power usage is the power 

(wattage) consumed by an appliance at 

the factory setting. Standby Mode may 

persist for an indefinite period of time.’’ 

(AHAM, TP No. 12 at p. 2) AHAM 

stated that appliances to which its 

comments apply should be shipped in 

this mode. If the factory or ‘‘default’’ 

settings are indicated in manufacturer’s 

instructions, AHAM stated that the 

appliance should be tested at those 

settings; otherwise, the appliance 

should be tested as shipped. Id. AHAM 

commented that any other feature 

accessible by the consumer should be 

considered as active mode, and, 

therefore, the definitions for off, standby 

and active modes should cover all 

clothes dryer and room air conditioner 

features. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at pp. 3– 

4) 

Although at this time DOE is 

proposing to amend the test procedures 

for room air conditioners and clothes 

dryers to include only provisions for 

measuring energy use in inactive mode 

and that delay start, cycle finished, and 

off-cycle modes would not be 

considered part of standby mode, DOE 

remains open to consideration of 

additional standby modes. Therefore, 

DOE is not renaming ‘‘inactive mode’’ to 

‘‘standby mode’’ in today’s SNOPR. 

However, DOE agrees that, in measuring 

the single significant standby mode 

(inactive mode), power consumption 

would be measured in the lowest 

possible energy state, as discussed in 

section III.B.3. 

In response to AHAM’s comments, 

DOE believes that provisions for setting 

up the appliance for standby mode and 

off mode testing should be specified in 

the test procedure. However, DOE 

believes that setting up the appliance in 

accordance with manufacturer’s 

instructions or in the as-shipped factory 

or ‘‘default’’ settings, as commented by 

AHAM, would allow manufacturers to 

ship appliances set in a low power 

mode that consumers may switch out of 

during typical standby or off mode use. 

In order to provide a clear and 

consistent testing method, DOE is 

proposing that the appliance be set up 

with the settings that produce the 

highest power consumption level, 

consistent with the particular mode 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37605 

19As with the definition for standby mode, IEC 

Standard 62301 CDV qualifies off mode as one that 

‘‘* * * usually persists’’ rather than one that ‘‘* * * 

may persist for an indefinite time.’’ For the same 

reasons as discussed for standby mode, DOE is 

proposing the latter definition. 

definition under test, for standby and off 

mode testing. 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D1, proposed section 3.6 

and appendix F, proposed section 4.2. 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

requested comment on additional 

standby modes under the EPCA 

definition which had not been 

identified and which could represent 

significant energy use. 73 FR 74639, 

74654 (Dec. 9, 2008) AHAM commented 

that, although there is the potential for 

networking in the future relating to 

functions such as peak load sharing, this 

feature would be considered part of 

active mode. According to AHAM, this 

mode might be selected by the 

consumer, thereby taking the product 

out of the default lowest power mode. 

(AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 3) PG&E 

commented that it agrees with AHAM 

that network mode should be 

considered. PG&E added that if network 

mode is on all the time, then this mode 

should be considered a standby 

function, whereas if this mode is 

consumer-activated and on for limited 

periods of time, it should be considered 

part of active mode. (PG&E, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 79, 

86) GE raised concerns that some 

utilities require that a network function 

remain on continuously in order for 

consumers to get the peak-power 

rebates, implying that manufacturers 

may not have control over the way this 

part of the control works. (GE, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 87) 

PG&E responded by commenting that 

network modes might be designed for 

low power and intermittent activation. 

(PG&E, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at pp. 87–88) 

Section 3.7 of IEC Standard 62301 

CDV defines network mode as a mode 

category which ‘‘includes any product 

modes where the energy-using product 

is connected to a main power source 

and at least one network function is 

activated (such as reactivation via 

network command or network integrity 

communication) but where the primary 

function is not active.’’ Section 3.7 of 

IEC Standard 62301 CDV also provides 

a note stating, ‘‘Where a network 

function is provided but is not active 

and/or not connected to a network, then 

this mode is not applicable. A network 

function could become active 

intermittently according to a fixed 

schedule or in response to a network 

requirement. A ‘network’ in this context 

includes communication between two 

or more separate independently 

powered devices or pieces of 

equipment. A network does not include 

one or more controls, which are 

dedicated to a single piece of 

equipment. Network mode may include 

one or more standby functions.’’ 

However, DOE is unaware of any 

clothes dryers or room air conditioners 

currently available on the market that 

incorporate a networking function. 

Further, DOE is unaware of any data 

regarding network mode in these 

products, which would allow it to 

determine appropriate testing 

procedures and mode definitions for 

incorporation into the test procedures 

for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. In particular, DOE is 

unaware of data and methods for the 

appropriate configuration of networks, 

whether network connection speed or 

the number and type of network 

connections affects power consumption, 

or whether wireless network devices 

may have different power consumptions 

when the device is looking for a 

connection and when the network 

connection is actually established. DOE 

is also unaware of how the energy 

consumption for clothes dryers and 

room air conditioners in a network 

environment may be affected by their 

product design and user interaction as 

well as network interaction, such as 

whether the network function could 

become active intermittently according 

to a fixed schedule or in response to a 

network requirement. For these reasons, 

the proposed amendments in today’s 

SNOPR do not include network mode. 

However, DOE welcomes comment on 

whether clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners are available that 

incorporate a networking function, and 

whether definitions and testing 

procedures for a network mode should 

be incorporated into the DOE test 

procedure. DOE also requests comment 

on appropriate methodologies for 

measuring energy consumption in a 

network mode, and data on the results 

and repeatability of such testing 

methodology. 

GE commented that standby mode 

should not apply to room air 

conditioners because they are 

considered continuously running 

products which operate in active mode 

100 percent of the time that they are 

plugged into the main electricity supply 

and not in off mode. (GE, TP No. 11 at 

p. 2) DOE determined that room air 

conditioners with remote controls 

operate in a mode which facilitates the 

activation of other modes (including 

activation or deactivation of active 

mode) by remote switch (including 

remote control). This mode is covered 

by both the proposed definition in 

today’s SNOPR and the EPCA definition 

for standby mode, and, hence, DOE 

believes that standby mode would apply 

to room air conditioners under the 

proposed definition. 

DOE also requested comment on the 

definition and clarifications of off mode 

that were proposed in the December 

2008 TP NOPR. AHAM stated it 

supports DOE’s definition of off mode, 

but believes this definition must be 

clarified. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at pp. 2– 

4) AHAM provided clarifications in its 

comments, which state the following: 

‘‘Off Mode describes the status of an 

appliance when it is connected to the main 

electricity supply and is providing no 

consumer-interactive function. Off Mode may 

persist for an indefinite period of time. 

Providing the product with an on/off switch 

satisfies this condition. 

Off Mode may include: 

1. LED or some other indication of off 

mode condition; 

2. Electric noise reduction capacitor, choke 

or filter; 

3. The state where a one-way remote 

control device has turned the product off, but 

cannot be used to activate the product. 

4. Leakage current will occur in some 

appliances, and may include current flow in 

208/230 volt appliances where only one leg 

of the line is isolated by the switch. 

5. May include electrical energy flow to a 

transformer of some electronics units.’’ 

(AHAM, TP No. 12 at p. 2) 

As discussed in section III.B.1, DOE is 

proposing in today’s SNOPR to amend 

the DOE test procedure for clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners to 

define off mode based upon the 

definition in IEC Standard 62301 CDV. 

DOE proposes to define off mode as a 

mode category which ‘‘includes any 

product modes where the energy using 

product is connected to a mains power 

source and is not providing any standby 

mode or active mode function and 

where the mode may persist for an 

indefinite time.19 An indicator that only 

shows the user that the product is in the 

off position is included within the 

clasification of off mode.’’ As noted in 

section III.B.1, this defintion was 

developed based on the definitions 

provided in IEC Standard 62301 CDV, 

and expands upon the EPCA mode 

definitions to provide additional 

clarifications as to which functions are 

associated with each mode. 

In response to AHAM’s comments 

regarding off mode, under the proposed 

mode definitions, a clothes dryer or 

room air conditioner equipped with a 

mechanical on/off switch which can 

disconnect power to the display and/or 

control components would be 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37606 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

considered as operating in the off mode 

when the switch is in the ‘‘off’’ position, 

provided that no other standby or active 

mode functions are energized. DOE 

agrees with AHAM that an energized 

LED or other indication that only shows 

the user that the product is in the off 

position would be considered part of off 

mode under the proposed definition, 

again if no other standby or active mode 

functions were energized. However, if 

any energy is consumed by the 

appliance in the presence of a one-way 

remote control, the unit would be 

operating in standby mode pursuant to 

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

which includes a remote control which 

facilitates the activation or deactivation 

of other functions (including active 

mode) as a feature of standby mode. 

DOE agrees that the other three 

conditions, which AHAM outlines in its 

comments, would be indicative of off 

mode. Because DOE believes that a oneway remote control would be a function 

associated with standby mode, and not 

off mode as stated by AHAM, DOE is 

not proposing to adopt AHAM’s 

definition for off mode. 

DOE also notes that section 3.9 of IEC 

Standard 62301 CDV provides a 

definition of ‘‘disconnected mode,’’ 

which is ‘‘the status in which all 

connections to mains power sources of 

the energy using product are removed or 

interrupted.’’ IEC Standard 62301 CDV 

also adds a note that common terms 

such as ‘‘unplugged’’ or ‘‘cut off from 

mains’’ also describe this mode and that 

this mode is not part of the low power 

mode category. DOE believes that there 

would be no energy use in a 

‘‘disconnected mode,’’ and therefore, is 

not proposing a definition or testing 

methods for such a mode in the DOE 

test procedure for clothes dryers or 

room air conditioners. 

3. Adding Specifications for the Test 

Methods and Measurements for Clothes 

Dryer and Room Air Conditioner 

Standby Mode and Off Mode Testing 

DOE proposed in the December 2008 

TP NOPR to establish test procedures 

for measuring all standby and off modes 

associated with clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners. 73 FR 74639, 74645 

(Dec. 9, 2008). As discussed in section 

III.B.2, the mode identified as inactive 

mode in the December 2008 TP NOPR 

is believed to be the only significant 

standby mode for clothes dryers and 

room air conditioners at this time. This 

section discusses product-specific 

clarifications of the procedures of IEC 

Standard 62301 when used to measure 

standby and off mode energy use for 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. 

a. Clothes Dryers 

DOE understands that displays on 

clothes dryers may reduce power 

consumption by automatically dimming 

or powering down after a certain period 

of user inactivity. For those clothes 

dryers for which the power input in 

inactive mode varies in this fashion 

during testing, DOE proposed in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR that that the 

test be conducted after the power level 

has dropped to its lower power state. 73 

FR 74639, 74645 (Dec. 9, 2008). 

PG&E commented that, while IEC 

Standard 62301 notes that some 

appliances wait in a higher-power state 

before dropping back to a lower-power 

state, the standard does not provide 

guidance on how long to wait for the 

appliance to drop to the lower-power 

state. (PG&E, Public Meeting Transcript, 

TP No. 8 at pp. 25–27) AHAM stated 

that section 5 of IEC Standard 62301 

specifies a stabilization time of 30 

minutes. (AHAM, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 28–29) 

AHAM subsequently clarified in written 

comments that IEC Standard 62301 calls 

for a stabilization period of at least 30 

minutes and a measurement period of at 

least 10 minutes, and that DOE’s test 

procedure should be consistent with 

that of IEC Standard 62301 to reduce 

test burden. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 4) 

Whirlpool commented that most test 

procedures involving electronics 

incorporate a 30-minute stabilization 

period and a 10-minute measurement 

period. Whirlpool believes that these 

requirements would be reasonable for 

DOE’s test procedures. (Whirlpool, TP 

No. 9 at p. 3) PG&E supported the 

specification of a 30-minute 

stabilization period. (PG&E, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 50) 

As part of the residential clothes dryer 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking preliminary analyses, DOE 

conducted standby mode and off mode 

testing on 11 representative residential 

clothes dryers. Table 0.1 shows the 

measured duration of the higher-power 

state for clothes dryers in DOE’s test 

sample. DOE observed during this 

testing that the higher-power state in 

inactive mode may persist for 

approximately 5–10 minutes of user 

inactivity after the user interface display 

has been energized for all products 

tested. 

TABLE 0.1—CLOTHES DRYER STANDBY MODE TESTING: DURATION OF HIGHER-POWER STATE

Product class Test unit Control type Automatic 

power-down? 

Duration of 

higherpower state 

(min) 

Vented Electric, Standard ........................ 1 Electromechanical .................................................. N ....................... ....................

2 Electromechanical .................................................. N ....................... ....................

3 Electronic ............................................................... Y ....................... 5 

4 Electromechanical .................................................. N ....................... ....................

5 Electromechanical .................................................. N ....................... ....................

Vented Electric, Compact (120 V) ............ 6 Electromechanical .................................................. N ....................... ....................

Vented Gas .............................................. 7 Electromechanical .................................................. N ....................... ....................

8 Electronic ............................................................... Y ....................... 5 

9 Electronic ............................................................... Y ....................... 5 

10 Electronic ............................................................... Y ....................... 7 

11 Electronic ............................................................... Y ....................... 7 

Paragraph 5.3.1 of section 5.3 of IEC 

Standard 62301 specifies, for products 

in which the power varies by not more 

than 5 percent from a maximum level 

during a period of 5 minutes, that the 

user waits at least 5 minutes for the 

product to stabilize and then measures 

the power at the end of an additional 

time period of not less than 5 minutes. 

Paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC Standard 62301 

contains provisions for measuring 

average power in cases where the power 

is not stable. In such cases, it requires 

a measurement period of no less than 5 

minutes, or one or more complete 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37607 

operating cycles of several minutes or 

hours. IEC Standard 62301 contains no 

requirement that the stabilization period 

extends to 30 minutes, nor that the 

measurement is made over a period of 

at least 10 minutes. However, based on 

its testing results shown in Table 0.1, 

DOE also notes that some clothes dryers 

may remain in the higher-power state 

for the duration of a 5-minute 

stabilization period and 5-minute 

measurement period, and then drop to 

the lower-power state that is more 

representative of inactive mode. In 

contrast, IEC Standard 62301 CDV 

specifies for each testing method that 

the product be allowed to stabilize for 

at least 30 minutes prior to a 

measurement period of not less than 10 

minutes. DOE believes this clarification 

would allow sufficient time for displays 

that automatically dim or power down 

after a period of user inactivity to reach 

the lower-power state prior to 

measurement. Based on the automatic 

power-down time periods observed in 

its own testing, DOE believes that the 

30-minute stabilization and 10-minute 

measurement periods suggested by 

commenters provide a clearer and more 

consistent testing procedure than the 

corresponding times specified in IEC 

Standard 62301. This allows for 

representative measurements among 

products that may have varying times 

before the power drops to a low level. 

DOE also notes that allowing a test 

period of ‘‘not less than’’ or ‘‘at least’’ a 

specified amount of time, as provided in 

both IEC Standard 62301 and IEC 

Standard 62301 CDV, may result in 

different test technicians testing the 

same product for different periods of 

time. In order to ensure that the testing 

procedures for standby and off mode are 

clear and consistent, such that different 

test technicians are testing the product 

using the same procedures, DOE is 

proposing to require that the 

stabilization period be 30 to 40 minutes, 

and the test period be 10 minutes. 10 

CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix D1, 

proposed section 3.6. 

The American Council for an Energy 

Efficient Economy (ACEEE) stated that 

the test procedure could be ‘‘gamed’’ by 

products for which the default setting 

would be for the display to power down 

after 5 minutes, but which would easily 

allow consumers to increase the 

duration of the higher-power state, or 

switch the product to permanently 

maintain the higher-power state. ACEEE 

commented that DOE should include 

additional guidance to level the playing 

field for all manufacturers. (ACEEE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at 

pp. 27–28) AHAM’s comments for all 

covered products suggest that these 

products may have provision for the 

consumer to add or delete product 

functions that alter the as-shipped 

standby energy consumption, and that 

the power consumption in these userselected states may exceed the power 

consumption in the lowest power 

consumption mode. AHAM stated that 

the consumer must be informed as to 

how to make the selections that would 

override the lowest power consumption 

mode. (AHAM, TP No. 12 at p. 2) 

DOE’s test procedures are developed 

to measure representative energy use for 

the typical consumer. DOE does not 

have data representing all possible 

consumer actions and appliance usage 

patterns that might increase energy use. 

As discussed above in section III.B.2, 

DOE is proposing that the appliance be 

set up with the settings that produce the 

highest power consumption level, 

consistent with the particular mode 

definition under test, for standby and off 

mode testing. DOE believes that this 

would prevent any ‘‘gaming’’ of default 

or as-shipped settings. For this reason, 

DOE has not proposed additional 

provisions in today’s SNOPR to address 

the possibility of adjusting the asshipped or default display settings or 

other features for higher energy use. 

However, DOE welcomes comment on 

methodologies to account for such 

consumer actions that might increase 

energy use and data on the 

corresponding consumer usage patterns. 

DOE proposed in the December 2008 

TP NOPR to adopt the test room 

ambient temperature of 73.4 ± 9 °F 

specified by IEC Standard 62301 for 

standby mode and off mode testing. 73 

FR 74639, 74645–46 (Dec. 9, 2008). This 

test room ambient temperature is 

slightly different from the ambient 

temperature currently specified for 

DOE’s drying performance tests of 

clothes dryers (75 ± 3 °F). However, the 

proposed test room ambient temperature 

conditions would permit manufacturers 

who opt to test active, standby, and off 

modes sequentially in the same test 

room to use the current ambient 

temperature requirements for drying 

tests, since the latter temperatures are 

within the limits specified by IEC 

Standard 62301. Alternatively, the 

proposed temperature specifications 

would allow a manufacturer that opts to 

conduct standby mode and off mode 

testing separately from drying tests more 

flexibility in ambient temperature. 

AHAM and Whirlpool supported DOE’s 

test room ambient temperature 

specifications for standby mode and off 

mode testing of clothes dryers. (AHAM, 

TP No. 10 at p. 5; Whirlpool, TP No. 9 

at p. 3) In the absence of comments 

objecting to the ambient temperature 

specifications, this SNOPR does not 

affect DOE’s proposal in the December 

2008 TP NOPR to use the test room 

ambient temperature specified by IEC 

Standard 62301 for clothes dryer 

standby mode and off mode testing. 

b. Room Air Conditioners 

A room air conditioner with a 

temperature display may use varying 

amounts of standby power depending 

on the digit(s) being displayed. DOE 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR to require that test room 

temperature be maintained at 74 ± 2 °F, 

and that the temperature control setting 

is 79 °F. 73 FR 74639, 74646 (Dec. 9, 

2008). These conditions differ from the 

cooling performance testing conditions 

in the DOE room air conditioner test 

procedure. The cooling performance test 

conditions are specified as 80 °F on the 

indoor side of the test chamber and 95 

°F on the outdoor side. In addition, the 

cooling performance test conditions do 

not specify a temperature control 

setting. DOE proposed the different test 

room conditions in the December 2008 

TP NOPR because such conditions 

would assure a consistent display 

configuration, and thus a representative 

power consumption, for all room air 

conditioners under test, particularly 

during off-cycle operation that was 

defined in the December 2008 TP NOPR 

as a standby mode. 73 FR 74639, 74646 

(Dec. 9, 2008). 

GE commented that the smaller 

tolerances specified by IEC Standard 

62301, for ambient conditions that differ 

from the conditions for cooling 

performance testing, represent a testing 

burden. GE believes that the proposed 

conditions would be relevant only for 

off-cycle mode. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 99–100) 

ACEEE commented that there would be 

no objection among interested parties to 

relax tolerance of the temperatures, if 

such close specification were not 

required. (ACEEE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 101) AHAM 

commented that the proposed test room 

temperature is unrealistic and 

burdensome. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 5) 

AHAM also stated that if off-cycle mode 

is considered part of active mode, then 

standby mode testing could be carried 

out in the same test chamber that is 

used for cooling performance testing 

because standby mode (other than offcycle) is not affected by ambient 

temperature. (AHAM, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 103–104) 

As part of the room air conditioner 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking preliminary analyses, DOE 

conducted standby mode and off mode 

testing on representative room air 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37608 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

conditioners. During its preliminary 

tests, DOE determined that room air 

conditioner displays among the units it 

tested do not provide any user 

information in inactive mode. In 

addition, DOE determined that the 

displays among the units it tested 

provide indication of time delay or time 

until start rather than temperature when 

the air conditioners are in delay start 

mode. These observations are supported 

by GE’s comment, discussed above, that 

the proposed test chamber ambient 

conditions would be relevant only for 

off-cycle mode. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 99–100) DOE 

concurs with GE’s position that if the 

test procedure were limited to 

measurement of a single standby mode 

and an off mode as discussed in section 

III.B.2, the proposed close tolerance on 

ambient temperature would not be 

required. DOE is, therefore, proposing in 

today’s SNOPR to provide flexibility in 

the room air conditioner test procedure 

amendments by allowing standby mode 

and off mode testing either in a test 

chamber used for measurement of 

cooling performance or in a separate test 

room that meets the specified standby 

mode and off mode test conditions. The 

proposed amendments to the room air 

conditioner test procedure in today’s 

SNOPR specify maintaining the indoor 

test conditions, if tested in a cooling 

performance test chamber, or room 

ambient test conditions, if tested in a 

separate test room, at the temperature 

required by section 4.2 of IEC Standard 

62301. Further, if the unit is tested in 

the cooling performance test chamber, 

the proposed amendments allow the 

manufacturer to maintain the outdoor 

test conditions either as specified for the 

DOE cooling test procedure or according 

to section 4.2 of IEC Standard 62301 for 

standby and off mode testing. DOE also 

notes that the indoor temperature 

conditions required by the DOE cooling 

performance test procedure fall within 

the temperature range allowed by 

section 4.2 of IEC Standard 62301. 

DOE proposed a test procedure for the 

delay start mode in the December 2008 

TP NOPR that required a 5-minute 

stabilization period followed by a 60- 

minute measurement period. 73 FR 

74639, 74646 (Dec. 9, 2008) Because the 

proposed amendments to the test 

procedure in today’s SNOPR are limited 

to the measurement of a single standby 

mode and an off mode as discussed in 

section III.B.2, DOE is not proposing any 

provisions in the room air conditioner 

test procedure for measuring delay start 

mode. 

Similar to clothes dryers, DOE 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR (73 FR 74639, 74646 (Dec. 9, 

2008)) that standby and off modes for 

room air conditioners, other than delay 

start mode, be tested with a stabilization 

period no less than 5 minutes and a 

measurement period no less than 5 

minutes for units with stable power, 

consistent with paragraph 5.3.1 of 

section 5.3 of IEC Standard 62301. In 

cases where the power was unstable, the 

provisions of paragraph 5.3.2 would 

apply, in which the measurement 

period would be no less than 5 minutes 

or one or more complete operating 

cycles. AHAM commented that IEC 

Standard 62301 requires a stabilization 

period at least 30 minutes long and a 

measurement period at least 10 minutes 

long and that DOE’s test procedure 

should be consistent with that of IEC 

Standard 62301 to reduce test burden. 

(AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 4) DOE does 

not have any information or data that 

would suggest that a 30-minute 

stabilization period followed by a 10- 

minute measurement period would 

produce more representative or 

consistent standby and off mode power 

measurements than the times proposed 

in the December 2008 TP NOPR. 

However, DOE also notes that 

allowing a test period of ‘‘not less than’’ 

or ‘‘at least’’ a specified amount of time, 

as provided in IEC Standard 62301, may 

result in different test technicians 

testing the same product for different 

periods of time. In order to ensure that 

the testing procedures for standby and 

off mode are clear and consistent, such 

that different test technicians are testing 

the product using the same exact 

procedures, DOE is proposing to require 

that the stabilization period be 5 to 10 

minutes, and the test period be 5 

minutes. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix F, proposed section 4.2. 

4. Calculation of Energy Use Associated 

With Standby Modes and Off Mode 

Measurements of power consumption 

associated with each standby and off 

mode for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners are expressed in W. The 

annual energy consumption in each of 

these modes for a clothes dryer or room 

air conditioner is the product of the 

power consumption in W and the time 

spent in that particular mode. 

a. Clothes Dryers 

Energy use for clothes dryers is 

expressed in terms of total energy use 

per drying cycle. As discussed in 

section III.D.3, DOE has determined that 

it is technically feasible to incorporate 

measures of standby and off mode 

energy use into the overall energy-use 

metric, a determination that is required 

by the EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) Therefore, 

DOE has examined standby and off 

mode energy consumption in terms of 

annual energy use apportioned on a percycle basis. Energy used during a drying 

cycle (active mode) is directly measured 

in the DOE test procedure, although 

adjustments are made to the directly 

measured energy to account for 

differences between test and field 

conditions. The energy use associated 

with continuously burning pilot lights 

of gas dryers is measured and is 

converted to an energy use per cycle by 

dividing calculated annual gas energy 

use by the representative average 

number of drying cycles per year (i.e., 

416). 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix D, section 4.4. DOE proposes 

that this procedure for gas standing pilot 

lights provides an approach for 

calculating standby mode and off mode 

power consumption on a per-cycle 

energy-use basis. 

Whirlpool commented that standing 

(i.e., continuously burning) pilot lights 

are not allowed in gas dryers and that 

it was unclear why DOE was referring 

to them in this context. (Whirlpool, TP 

No. 9 at p. 2) The Federal standards 

prohibiting such pilot lights were 

established by the NAECA amendments 

to EPCA for gas clothes dryers 

manufactured after January 1, 1988. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(g)(3)) However, the 

subsequent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for clothes dryers 

amended those standards to require 

performance standards for all product 

classes of clothes dryers, including gas 

clothes dryers, based on EF, for clothes 

dryers manufactured on or after May 14, 

1994. The amended energy conservation 

standards replaced the previous 

standards, and thus eliminated the 

prohibition of standing pilot lights. (56 

FR 22250 (May 14, 1991)); 10 CFR 

430.32(h)(1)). Although DOE is unaware 

of any current models of gas clothes 

dryers incorporating standing pilot 

lights, the methodology for measuring 

the energy consumption of such a 

feature is included in the current DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure because 

standing pilot lights are not precluded 

by the standards. For this reason, DOE 

continues to consider the methodology 

for incorporating standing pilot light 

annual energy use in the EF metric for 

gas dryers a viable approach for 

incorporating the annual energy use of 

modes other than active mode into the 

per-cycle energy-use metric. 

In the existing test procedure, energy 

use per cycle for continuously burning 

pilot lights is calculated by multiplying 

the energy use measured for a period of 

one hour by an established number of 

hours per year that the dryer is not in 

drying mode, and dividing by the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37609 

representative average cycles per year. 

The existing test procedure established 

that a gas clothes dryer is in the drying 

mode 140 hours per year, and that the 

balance of the year (8,620 hours) is the 

established number of hours associated 

with the pilot light energy consumption. 

DOE proposed in the December 2008 

TP NOPR to adopt a similar approach 

for measuring energy consumption 

during standby and off modes for 

clothes dryers. Specifically, DOE 

proposed to adopt the current 140 hours 

associated with drying (i.e., the active 

mode) and to associate the remaining 

8,620 hours of the year with the standby 

and off modes. Table 0.2 presents the 

comparison of the approximate wattages 

and annual energy use associated with 

all modes that DOE proposed in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 

74647–48 (Dec. 9, 2008). 

TABLE 0.2—DOE ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL ENERGY USE OF CLOTHES DRYER MODES

Mode Hours Typical Power 

(W) 

Annual Energy Use 

(kWh) 

Active ............................................................................................................... 140 6,907 ......................... 967. 

Delay Start ....................................................................................................... * 34 3 ................................ 0.1. 

Cycle Finished ................................................................................................. ** 429 3 ................................ 1. 

Off and Inactive ............................................................................................... † 8,157 0.5 to 3 ...................... 4 to 24. 

* 5 minutes per cycle × 416 cycles per year 

** 5 percent of remaining time (0.05 × (8,760 ¥ 140 ¥ 34) = 429) † 95 percent of remaining time (0.95 × (8,760 ¥ 140 ¥ 34) = 8,157) 

GE and AHAM commented that the 

0.5 to 3 W range provided for standby 

modes is typical for displays on 

appliances. (GE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 113; AHAM, 

Public Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at 

pp. 113–114.) 

At the December 17 Public Meeting, 

AHAM expressed general support of the 

DOE estimates of energy use. (AHAM, 

Public Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at 

p. 122.) Whirlpool commented that 

work carried out among AHAM 

members has included the development 

of a representative allocation of hours to 

the applicable clothes dryer operating 

modes. (Whirlpool, TP No. 9 at p. 3.) 

The data Whirlpool provided for this 

allocation are reproduced as Table 0.3 

below. 

TABLE 0.3—WHIRLPOOL-SUPPLIED ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL HOURS FOR CLOTHES DRYER MODES

DOE proposal Whirlpool/AHAM definition Whirlpool hours 

Active ........................................................................... Active ........................................................................... 140 (20 minutes per cycle). 

Inactive ......................................................................... Standby ....................................................................... Assume equal to Delay Start. 

Cycle Finished ............................................................. Active ........................................................................... 416 (1 hour/cycle). 

Delay Start ................................................................... Active ........................................................................... 69 (10 minutes/cycle). 

Off ................................................................................ Off ................................................................................ Balance [8,066]. 

The Whirlpool data confirm DOE’s 

selection of 140 hours for active drying 

mode. The key difference between the 

hours proposed by DOE and Whirlpool 

is that Whirlpool allocates only 10 

minutes per cycle to inactive mode (69 

hours annually), resulting in 8,066 

hours allocated to off mode. DOE 

believes that the proposed definition of 

off mode as applied to clothes dryers 

refers to dryers with mechanical rather 

than electronic controls or to dryers 

with electronic controls that have a 

mechanical switch with which the user 

can de-energize the electronic controls. 

Reactivation of the dryer with a 

pushbutton sensor, touch sensor, or 

other similar device that consumes 

power is considered to be a standby 

mode feature under the proposed 

definition, in which one possible 

standby mode ‘‘facilitate[s] the 

activation of other modes (including 

activation or deactivation of active 

mode) by remote switch (including 

remote control), internal sensor, timer.’’ 

10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix 

D1, proposed section 1.19 and appendix 

F, proposed section 1.5. Based on DOE’s 

tests, it concluded that there are few 

clothes dryers with electronic controls 

that have this additional mechanical 

switch. Therefore, the combined 

inactive/off hours would most likely be 

allocated fully either to inactive or off 

mode, depending on the type of controls 

present on the clothes dryer. DOE does 

not have market share information to 

determine how many clothes dryers are 

currently shipped with 

electromechanical controls, but DOE 

believes that the relative proportion of 

inactive and off mode annual hours as 

contained in Whirlpool’s data 

submission may not be wholly 

representative of the relative shipments 

of clothes dryers with electronic and 

electromechanical controls because it 

implies that virtually all clothes dryers 

would be equipped with 

electromechanical controls, and DOE’s 

review of clothes dryer models currently 

available does not support such a 

conclusion. For this reason, DOE 

believes that, under the proposed 

definitions of standby and off modes, 

the allocation of annual hours to 

inactive and off modes are appropriate 

and this SNOPR does not affect DOE’s 

proposal in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR for this allocation of hours. 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed an alternative simplified 

methodology for allocating annual 

hours. 73 FR 74639, 74648 (Dec. 9, 

2008). The comparison of annual energy 

use of different clothes dryer modes 

shows that delay start and cycle 

finished modes represent a negligible 

percentage of total annual energy 

consumption. In addition, for clothes 

dryers currently on the market, power 

levels in these modes are similar to 

those for off/inactive modes. Therefore, 

DOE proposed that all of the non-active 

hours (which total 8,620) would be 

allocated to the inactive and off modes. 

73 FR 74639, 74648 (Dec. 9, 2008). 

AHAM commented that it supports the 

alternative approach, but that the delay 

start and cycle finished mode hours 

more appropriately would be combined 

with the active mode hours than with 

the inactive and off mode hours. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37610 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

20Multiplying by 0.75 eliminates hours 

associated with unplugged hours, assumed for half 

of the hours of the year for half of room air 

conditioners as described in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR (73 FR 74639, 74648 (Dec. 9, 2008)); 750 = 

Cooling (active mode) hours; 705 = Fan-only (active 

mode) hours. 

(AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at p. 123; AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 

6.) As discussed in section III.B.2, DOE 

has determined that delay start and 

cycle finished modes are not standby 

modes according to the definitions 

proposed in today’s SNOPR. Therefore, 

DOE is not proposing to combine delay 

start and cycle finished mode hours 

with active mode hours as commented 

by AHAM. However, because the power 

consumption of clothes dryers operating 

in such modes approximates the power 

levels in off/inactive modes, it would be 

more appropriate under a simplified 

approach to allocate the hours 

associated with delay start and cycle 

finished modes to off/inactive modes. 

Therefore, in today’s SNOPR, because 

DOE is not proposing amendments to 

the clothes dryer test procedure to 

measure delay start and cycle finished 

power consumption, DOE is proposing 

to maintain the estimate of 8,620 hours 

as the non-active hours that would be 

allocated to inactive and off modes for 

clothes dryers. 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to allocate the number of 

hours for the combined off and inactive 

modes entirely to either off mode or 

standby mode, as appropriate, if only 

one of these modes is possible for the 

clothes dryer. DOE noted in the October 

2008 TP NOPR that information to guide 

allocation of the hours for clothes dryers 

that have both inactive and off modes is 

currently unavailable. Two operational 

scenarios exist: (1) A clothes dryer 

reverts to an off mode after a specified 

time in inactive mode; or (2) a clothes 

dryer stays in inactive mode unless the 

user switches the appliance back to off 

mode. DOE does not have information 

regarding the percentage of clothes 

dryers being sold that fall into each of 

these categories. Because of this 

limitation, DOE proposed in the October 

2008 TP NOPR to allocate half of the 

hours determined for off/inactive modes 

to each of the two modes. 73 FR 74639, 

74648 (Dec. 9, 2008). Because of DOE’s 

interpretation of the inactive and off 

mode data supplied by Whirlpool as not 

being representative of typical inactive 

and off mode hours under the EPCA 

mode definitions, and in the absence of 

additional data regarding allocation of 

hours, this SNOPR does not affect DOE’s 

proposal in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR for the allocation of hours 

between inactive mode and off mode. 

DOE recognizes that the analysis of 

the number of annual hours allocated to 

each clothes dryer mode are based, in 

part, on the number of annual use 

cycles. Although, as discussed in 

section III.C.5.a, DOE believes that the 

average number of annual cycles is 

currently 283 rather than the 416 cycles 

specified in the current DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure, DOE does not have 

any information on whether active 

mode cycle times may have changed 

accordingly. It is possible that the 

smaller number of use cycles may 

correspond to larger load sizes and thus, 

potentially, longer drying times. 

Therefore, in consideration of 

Whirlpool’s data submittal which 

supported DOE’s estimate of 140 hours 

in active mode, DOE is proposing in 

today’s SNOPR the same allocation of 

hours for inactive mode and off mode 

that were proposed in the December 

2008 TP NOPR even though it is 

proposing fewer annual use cycles. 

In summary, DOE is proposing to 

amend the clothes dryer test procedure 

to calculate clothes dryer energy use per 

cycle associated with inactive and off 

modes by: (1) Calculating the product of 

wattage and allocated hours for inactive 

and off modes, depending on which of 

these modes are possible; (2) summing 

the results; (3) dividing the sum by 

1,000 to convert from Wh to kWh; and 

(4) dividing by 283 cycles per year. The 

8,620 hours for off/inactive modes 

would be allocated entirely to either off 

mode or inactive mode, as appropriate, 

if only one of these modes is possible 

for the clothes dryer. If both modes were 

possible, the hours would be allocated 

to each mode equally as discussed 

above in this section, and each would be 

allocated 4,310 hours. 

b. Room Air Conditioners 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

stated it was not aware of reliable data 

for hours spent in different standby and 

off modes in room air conditioners. 

Therefore, DOE estimated the annual 

hours for standby and off modes and the 

relative magnitude of annual energy use 

in standby and off modes in an example 

for a representative 8,000 Btu/hour 

(Btu/h), 9 EER unit that has delay start, 

off-cycle, and inactive modes. 73 FR 

7439, 74648–49 (Dec. 9, 2008). DOE’s 

estimates of annual energy use in each 

mode are shown in Table 0.4. 

TABLE 0.4—DOE ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL ENERGY USE OF ROOM AIR CONDITIONER MODES FOR A REPRESENTATIVE UNIT

WITH 8,000 BTU/H CAPACITY AND 9 EER 

Mode Hours Typical Power 

(W) 

Annual Energy Use 

(kWh) 

Active Cooling .......................................................................................... 750 889 667 

Delay Start ............................................................................................... 90 2 0.2 

Off-Cycle .................................................................................................. 440 2 0.9 

Off and Standby ....................................................................................... 4,850 0.5 to 2 2.5 to 10 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

presented an alternative simplified 

methodology. Similar to the analysis for 

clothes dryers, the comparison of 

annual energy use of different room air 

conditioner modes shows that delay 

start and off-cycle modes represent a 

small percentage of annual energy use 

in the active mode, and that the power 

consumption in those standby modes 

are distinct from but comparable to 

those for off/inactive modes. Thus, DOE 

proposed adopting an alternative 

approach focusing only on off and 

inactive modes. In that case, the nonactive hours are allocated as if the room 

air conditioner has only the inactive 

standby mode. A total of 5,115 hours 

would be allocated to the standby and 

off modes (8,760 × 0.75 ¥ 750 ¥705 = 

5,115).20 73 FR 74639, 74649 (Dec. 9, 

2008). AHAM and GE support this 

alternative proposal, with the 

clarification that the off-cycle and delay 

start hours should be considered part of 

the active mode hours rather than part 

of the standby or off mode hours. 

(AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at p. 130; AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 

6; GE, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at p. 131.) In today’s SNOPR, 

because DOE is not proposing 

amendments to the room air conditioner 

test procedure to measure delay start 

and off-cycle power consumption, DOE 

is proposing the estimate of 5,115 hours 

as the non-active hours that would be 

allocated to inactive and off modes for 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37611 

room air conditioners. For the same 

reasons as discussed for delay start and 

cycle finished modes for clothes dryers, 

DOE believes that the delay start and 

off-cycle hours for room air conditioners 

should be allocated to inactive and off 

modes even though it has determined 

that delay start and off-cycle modes are 

not standby modes. 

Typically, room air conditioners with 

remote control can be controlled 

whenever they are plugged in; hence, 

these units do not have provision for an 

off mode in addition to inactive mode. 

However, if a room air conditioner 

allows the user to switch off remote 

control operation, such a product would 

be capable of both off and inactive 

modes. DOE notes that information to 

guide allocation of the hours for room 

air conditioners that have both inactive 

and off modes is currently unavailable. 

For these units, DOE proposed in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR that the off/ 

inactive hours are allocated equally to 

the off and inactive modes for such a 

product. Otherwise, for units that are 

capable of operation in only off or 

inactive mode, DOE proposed that all of 

the hours be allocated to the appropriate 

mode. 73 FR 74639, 74649 (Dec. 9, 

2008). In the absence of comments on or 

additional data regarding allocation of 

hours, this SNOPR does not affect DOE’s 

proposal in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR for the allocation of hours 

between inactive mode and off mode. 

In summary, DOE is proposing to 

amend the room air conditioner test 

procedure to calculate room air 

conditioner annual energy use 

associated with inactive and off modes 

by: (1) Calculating the products of 

wattage and allocated hours for inactive 

and off modes, depending on which of 

these modes is possible; (2) summing 

the results; and (3) dividing the sum by 

1,000 to convert from Wh to kWh. The 

5,115 hours for off/inactive modes 

would be allocated entirely to either off 

mode or inactive mode, as appropriate, 

if only one of these modes is possible 

for the room air conditioner. If both 

modes were possible, the hours would 

be allocated to each mode equally as 

discussed above in this section, and 

each would be allocated 2,557.5 hours. 

5. Measures of Energy Consumption 

The DOE test procedures for clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners 

currently provide for the calculation of 

several measures of energy 

consumption. For clothes dryers, the 

test procedure incorporates the 

following: Various measures of percycle energy consumption; including 

total per-cycle electric dryer energy 

consumption; per-cycle gas dryer 

electrical energy consumption; per-cycle 

gas dryer gas energy consumption; percycle gas dryer continuously burning 

pilot light gas energy consumption; total 

per-cycle gas dryer gas energy 

consumption expressed in Btu; and total 

per-cycle gas dryer gas energy 

consumption expressed in kWh. 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix D, 

sections 4.1–4.5. The test procedure also 

provides an EF, which is equal to the 

clothes load in pounds divided either by 

the total per-cycle electric dryer energy 

consumption or by the total per-cycle 

gas dryer energy consumption expressed 

in kWh. 10 CFR 430.23(d). For room air 

conditioners, the test procedure 

calculates annual energy consumption 

in kWh and an EER. 10 CFR 430.23(f). 

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

directs that the ‘‘[t]est procedures for all 

covered products shall be amended 

pursuant to section 323 to include 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption * * * with such energy 

consumption integrated into the overall 

energy efficiency, energy consumption, 

or other energy descriptor for each 

covered product, unless the Secretary 

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.’’ 

As part of the December 2008 TP 

NOPR DOE explored whether the 

existing measures of energy 

consumption for clothes dryers and 

room air conditioners can be combined 

with standby mode and off mode energy 

use to form a single metric. For the 

reasons presented in the December 2008 

TP NOPR, DOE proposed combined 

metrics addressing active, standby, and 

off modes for clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners, as discussed below. 

a. Clothes Dryers 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to establish the following 

measures of energy consumption for 

clothes dryers that integrate energy use 

of standby and off modes with energy 

use of main functions of the products. 

‘‘Per-cycle integrated total energy 

consumption expressed in kWh’’ will be 

defined as the sum of per-cycle standby 

and off mode energy consumption and 

either total per-cycle electric dryer 

energy consumption or total per-cycle 

gas dryer energy consumption expressed 

in kWh, depending on which type of 

clothes dryer is involved. ‘‘Integrated 

energy factor’’ (IEF) will be defined as 

the (clothes dryer test load weight in 

lb)/(per-cycle integrated total energy in 

kWh). 73 FR 74639, 74650 (Dec. 9, 

2008). 

b. Room Air Conditioners 

In the December 2008 TP NOPR, DOE 

proposed to establish the following 

measures of energy consumption for 

room air conditioners that integrate 

energy use of standby and off modes 

with energy use of main functions of the 

products. ‘‘Integrated annual energy 

consumption’’ will be defined as the 

sum of annual energy consumption and 

standby and off mode energy 

consumption. ‘‘Integrated energy 

efficiency ratio’’ (IEER) will be defined 

as (cooling capacity in Btu/hr × 750 

hours average time in cooling mode)/ 

(integrated annual energy consumption 

× 1,000 Wh per kWh). 73 FR 74639, 

74650 (Dec. 9, 2008). 

AHAM, Whirlpool, and GE all 

supported the proposed integrated 

measures of energy consumption and 

energy efficiency for clothes dryers and 

room air conditioners combining 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption with active mode energy 

consumption. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 

6; Whirlpool, TP No. 9 at p. 3; GE, TP 

No. 11 at p. 1) PG&E and ACEEE both 

commented that an integrated metric for 

these products is largely irrelevant. 

(PG&E, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at p. 147, ACEEE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, TP No. 8 at pp. 146–147) 

PG&E recognizes the legal requirements 

and limitations, but it does not support 

an integrated metric. It stated that many 

of the covered appliances use a large 

amount of energy in active mode and 

only a small amount in standby mode. 

PG&E also commented that the 

measurements of energy use in active 

and standby mode can be combined, but 

the cost of reducing standby mode 

energy use, which is small but could be 

made smaller very inexpensively, is 

low. PG&E suggested a prescriptive limit 

on standby power or a voluntary 

agreement for a standby power limit. 

(PG&E, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at pp. 143–144) ACEEE stated that 

the public policy objective in EISA 2007 

was to encourage limitations of the 

amount of energy wasted when a 

covered product is not in active mode, 

regardless of the type of product. ACEEE 

believes that it would be more 

straightforward to simply place a 

limitation on the wattage at each of 

these non-operating cycle conditions, 

which would encourage manufacturers 

to incorporate low-standby-power 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37612 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

components such as improved power 

supplies. ACEEE also commented that it 

is not sure why DOE is mixing in source 

use of gas with site use of electricity to 

present integrated measures that do not 

help minimize the relatively small 

contributions of non-duty cycle energy 

use. ACEEE believes such an approach 

is not technically feasible unless all 

energy is site use because of the many 

disagreements about the appropriate 

site-to-source conversions and because 

these conversions vary so much among 

regions and times of day. (ACEEE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at 

pp. 140–142) 

EPCA directs that standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption be 

integrated into the overall energy 

efficiency, energy consumption, or other 

energy descriptor for each product 

unless the Secretary determines—(i) The 

current test procedure already fully 

accounts for and incorporates the 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption; or (ii) such an integrated 

test procedure is technically infeasible 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)). DOE 

tentatively determined in the December 

2008 TP NOPR that it is technically 

feasible to integrate standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption into the 

overall energy consumption metrics for 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. 73 FR 74639, 74650 (Dec. 

9, 2008). In the case of clothes dryers, 

the DOE test procedure already allows 

for a measure of standby power (i.e., 

pilot gas consumption) to be 

incorporated into EF. For both clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners, the 

difference in energy use in active and 

standby modes is so large that standby 

power has little impact on the overall 

measure of energy efficiency. Therefore, 

it is technically feasible for both 

products to integrate standby and off 

mode power into the energy-use metric. 

While DOE recognizes that a 

prescriptive standard for standby and 

off mode power could have certain 

advantages for products such as clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners in 

which energy use in such modes 

represents such a small percentage of 

annual energy use in the active mode, 

EISA 2007 provides a clear requirement 

for an integrated metric where technical 

feasibility for such incorporation is 

determined. In response to ACEEE’s 

comment regarding the technical 

feasibility of mixing source use of gas 

with site use of electricity to present 

integrated measures of energy use, DOE 

notes that the current DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure only considers gas use at 

the appliance site, precluding the need 

for a site-to-source conversion factor. 

Since the test procedure already 

incorporates both electrical energy 

consumption and gas energy 

consumption for gas clothes dryers, 

converting the gas energy consumption 

metric, Btu/h, to kWh to obtain total 

energy consumption, DOE concludes 

that considering additional electricity or 

gas usage during standby mode or off 

mode would also be technically feasible. 

DOE was also made aware that the 

Air-Conditioning, Heating and 

Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Standard 

340/360–2007, ‘‘Performance Rating of 

Commercial and Industrial Unitary AirConditioning and Heat Pump 

Equipment,’’ (AHRI Standard 340/360) 

and the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2007, 

‘‘Energy Standard for Buildings Except 

Low-Rise Residential Buildings,’’ 

(ASHRAE 90.1) both published in 2007, 

included an IEER metric, also named 

‘‘Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio,’’ 

which is meant to rate the part-load 

performance of the air-conditioning 

equipment under test. Manufacturers of 

the equipment covered by these 

standards currently list IEER ratings in 

their product literature and in the AHRI 

certified product directory. This IEER 

metric does not integrate standby mode 

and off mode energy use, as is being 

proposed in today’s SNOPR. Because 

the IEER metric used in AHRI Standard 

340/360 and ASHRAE 90.1 was 

established prior to the IEER proposed 

in this rulemaking, DOE is proposing for 

today’s SNOPR to revise the name of the 

integrated metrics incorporating standby 

mode and off mode energy use to 

‘‘combined’’ metrics for both clothes 

dryers and room air conditioners. 

For these reasons, today’s SNOPR 

proposes to incorporate into the DOE 

test procedures the ‘‘per-cycle combined 

total energy consumption expressed in 

kWh’’ and ‘‘combined energy factor’’ 

(CEF) for clothes dryers and ‘‘combined 

annual energy consumption’’ and 

‘‘combined energy efficiency ratio’’ 

(CEER) for room air conditioners as 

were proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 74650 (Dec. 9, 

2008). 

AHAM and GE noted that DOE did 

not propose in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR to amend the annual energy cost 

calculations for room air conditioners in 

10 CFR 430.23 to include the cost of 

standby mode and off mode energy use. 

(AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, TP 

No. 8 at pp. 164–165; GE, Public 

Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at p. 164) 

AHAM stated that such an annual 

energy cost should be obtained by 

multiplying the integrated annual 

energy consumption from the new 

method by the representative average 

unit cost of electrical energy in dollars 

per kWh. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at p. 6) 

DOE is not proposing to amend the 

annual energy cost calculations in 10 

CFR 430.23 for clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners to include the cost of 

energy consumed in standby and off 

modes because: 

• EPCA as amended by EISA does not 

require DOE to include standby and off 

mode energy costs in the annual energy 

cost calculation; and 

• The Federal Trade Commission’s 

(FTC’s) EnergyGuide Label for room air 

conditioners includes as an indicator of 

product energy efficiency the annual 

energy cost, compared to a range of 

annual energy costs of similar products. 

Appendix E to 16 CFR part 305. An 

annual energy cost incorporating 

standby and off mode energy would no 

longer be directly comparable to the 

minimum and maximum energy costs 

prescribed for the EnergyGuide Label. 

Clothes dryers are not covered products 

for the EnergyGuide Label. 

C. Clothes Dryer and Room Air 

Conditioner Active Mode Test 

Procedures 

1. Correction of Text Describing Energy 

Factor Calculation for Clothes Dryers 

DOE proposed in the December 2008 

TP NOPR to correct certain errors 

contained in specific references used in 

the current DOE test procedure 

regulation. 73 FR 74639, 74650 (Dec. 9, 

2008). In particular, the reference to 

sections 2.6.1 and 2.6.2 of 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D in the 

calculation of EF for clothes dryers 

found at section 430.23(d)(2) was 

determined to be incorrect and should 

refer instead to sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2. 

Section 2.6 provides instructions for the 

test clothes to be used in energy testing 

of clothes dryers, whereas section 2.7 

provides instructions on test loads. The 

EF of clothes dryers is measured in lbs 

of clothes per kWh. Since the EF 

calculation requires the weight of the 

test load, DOE proposed in the 

December 2008 TP NOPR to correct 

these references in 10 CFR 430.23(d)(2). 

DOE did not receive any comments 

opposing this correction. Therefore, this 

SNOPR does not affect DOE’s proposal 

in the December 2008 TP NOPR for this 

same correction. 

2. Automatic Cycle Termination for 

Clothes Dryers 

In the October 2007 Framework 

Document, DOE stated that it believes 

that the clothes dryer test procedure 

may not adequately measure the 

benefits of automatic cycle termination, 

in which a sensor monitors either the 

exhaust air temperature or moisture in 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37613 

21A notation in the form ‘‘AHAM, STD No. 8 at 

p.2’’ identifies a written comment that DOE has 

received and has included in the docket of the 

energy conservation standards rulemaking for 

clothes dryers and room air conditioners (Docket 

No. EE–2007–STD–0010). This particular notation 

refers to a comment (1) submitted by the 

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers 

(AHAM), (2) in document number 8 in the docket 

of that rulemaking, and (3) appearing on page 2 of 

document number 8. 

22A notation in the form ‘‘ACEEE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, STD No. 4.6, p. 36’’ identifies an oral 

comment that DOE received during the October 24, 

2007, framework public meeting and that was 

recorded in the public meeting transcript in the 

docket for the energy conservation standards 

rulemaking for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners (Docket No. EE–2007–STD–0010), 

maintained in the Resource Room of the Building 

Technologies Program. This particular notation 

refers to a comment (1) made by the American 

Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) 

during the public meeting, (2) recorded in 

document number 4.6, which is the public meeting 

transcript that is filed in the docket of that 

rulemaking, and (3) which appears on page 36 of 

document number 4.6. 

the drum to determine the length of the 

drying cycle. (Framework Document, 

STD No. 1 at p. 5.) Currently, the test 

procedure provides a single credit for 

the enhanced performance of clothes 

dryers equipped with automatic 

termination but does 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. The current clothes 

dryer test procedure provides a credit in 

the calculation of EF for clothes dryers 

equipped with an automatic cycle 

termination feature, defined in terms of 

an FU scaling factor applied to the percycle drying energy consumption. Gas 

or electric clothes dryers with time 

termination control (i.e., those dryers 

equipped only with a timer to determine 

the end of a drying cycle) are assigned 

an FU of 1.18, while dryers with 

automatic termination are assigned an 

FU of 1.04. Therefore, clothes dryers 

with automatic cycle termination 

control receive a 12-percent credit as 

compared to a comparable dryer with 

time termination control, which is 

assumed to consume more energy due to 

over- or under-drying, which in the 

latter case can result in consumers 

running an additional drying cycle. DOE 

sought comment in the October 2007 

Framework Document on such a test 

procedure revision. 

In response to the October 2007 

Framework Document, AHAM, Edison 

Electric Institute (EEI), Alliance 

Laundry Systems (ALS), and the 

Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) 

commented that the clothes dryer test 

procedure should be changed to account 

for the use of automatic cycle 

termination. (AHAM, STD No. 8 at p. 2; 

EEI, STD No. 5 at p. 2; ALS, STD No. 

6 at p. 1; CEE, STD No. 10 at p. 2.)21

Whirlpool commented that automatic 

cycle termination reduces over- or 

under-drying. According to Whirlpool, 

over-drying wastes energy directly, and 

under-drying leads to consumer use of 

a second clothes-drying cycle. 

Whirlpool believes that the test 

procedure should credit both 

temperature sensing and moisture 

sensing automatic termination and, 

because moisture sensing is less subject 

to over- or under-drying, this approach 

should receive greater credit. Whirlpool 

added that it would need additional 

time to evaluate a specific 

recommendation on the nature of the 

credit. (Whirlpool, STD No. 7 at p. 2.) 

The ACEEE, Appliance Standards 

Awareness Project (ASAP), Natural 

Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and 

the Northwest Power and Conservation 

Council (NPCC) (hereafter ‘‘Joint 

Comment’’) stated in jointly filed 

comments that DOE should verify the 

benefits of automatic cycle termination 

for clothes dryers and that testing 

should be conducted on new and 

accelerated-use models to verify longterm effectiveness. The Joint Comment 

added that the test procedure should not 

provide any ‘‘default’’ efficiency credit 

for reduced cycle time unless such 

benefits have been verified through 

actual testing. (Joint Comment, STD No. 

9 at p. 13.) At the October 24, 2007 

framework document public meeting, 

ACEEE questioned whether the current 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure allows 

for ambiguity or less-than-optimum 

results in terms of cycle termination 

when the clothes are defined to be dry. 

(ACEEE, Public Meeting Transcript, 

STD No. 4.6 at p. 36.) 22

Based on comments received in 

response to the October 2007 

Framework Document, DOE agrees that 

the benefit of automatic cycle 

termination should be more accurately 

credited, and that this credit should 

account for any over- or under-drying. 

Therefore, DOE considered potential 

amendments to the DOE test procedure 

to account for automatic cycle 

termination. DOE investigated other 

clothes dryer test procedures for 

measuring the effectiveness of automatic 

cycle termination and conducted 

limited testing to analyze over-drying 

energy consumption and the 

applicability of the proposed 

amendments to the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure. 

DOE reviewed industry and 

international clothes dryer test 

standards for testing methods and 

procedures for evaluating clothes dryers 

that use automatic cycle termination. 

DOE noted that AHAM recently 

published an update to its industry test 

standard, AHAM HLD–1–2009, 

‘‘Household Tumble Type Clothes 

Dryers’’ (AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009), 

which contains provisions for 

measuring the over-drying energy 

consumption for dryers that use 

automatic cycle termination. DOE also 

noted that the international test 

standards EN Standard 61121 and AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.1 both address 

methods for testing dryers with 

automatic termination sensor 

technologies. EN Standard 61121 is 

used in European Union (EU) member 

countries. DOE notes that this test 

standard appears to be identical to the 

IEC Standard 61121, which is used in 

other countries such as China. 

As noted above, DOE reviewed the 

recently issued AHAM Standard HLD– 

1–2009, which provides separate testing 

procedures for automatic termination 

sensing dryers and timer dryers. For 

timer dryers, AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009 requires that the test cycle (with 

the temperature set to maximum) is run 

until the load is dried to 5-percent ± 1- 

percent RMC, which can be determined 

from experience or continuous 

weighing. The test procedure in AHAM 

Standard HLD–1–2009 for automatic 

termination sensing dryers requires that 

the dryer be operated at the maximum 

temperature setting and the test cycle is 

stopped when it just reaches cool down. 

If the RMC is less than 6 percent, then 

the test is valid and is repeated two 

more times. AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009 allows automatic termination 

sensing dryers to dry the test load to any 

value below 6-percent RMC, and the 

total energy consumption and final RMC 

are recorded. DOE notes that the 

procedures for timer dryers and 

automatic termination sensing dryers 

both require that the initial RMC of the 

test load be 70 percent ± 5 percent. 

Annex H of AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009 contains moisture removal 

datasheet tables that can be used to 

record testing data. As noted above, the 

test requires that the total energy input 

and the final RMC be recorded at the 

end of the test cycle for both timer 

dryers and automatic termination 

sensing dryers. Table H.2 of annex H, 

which includes test values to record for 

automatic termination sensing dryers, 

requires that the time to dry to 5-percent 

RMC and total energy to reach 5-percent 

RMC be recorded. This table indicates 

that the time to dry the test load to 5- 

percent RMC can be estimated using 

dynamic scale recording and that the 

total energy to reach 5-percent RMC can 

be estimated using dynamic energy 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37614 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

23Table 3 of EN Standard 61121 specifies the 

final moisture content of the test load after drying 

for ‘‘dry cotton’’ programme as 0 percent with an 

allowable range of ±3 percent. 

recording and the time determined 

above. From this, the over-drying energy 

loss is calculated by subtracting the total 

energy to reach 5-percent RMC from the 

total measured energy input. Therefore, 

an automatic termination-sensing dryer 

that dries the test load to between 5- and 

6-percent final RMC would have no 

over-drying energy consumption. DOE 

believes that AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009 provides a clear methodology for 

measuring the over-drying energy 

consumption for automatic termination 

sensing dryers and provides a means for 

comparing the accuracy of different 

automatic termination sensor 

technologies used in different clothes 

dryer models. However, DOE believes 

that AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009 does 

not provide an appropriate method for 

comparing the amount of over-drying 

for a timer dryer to that of an automatic 

termination-sensing dryer. According to 

the methods in AHAM Standard HLD– 

1–2009, a timer dryer could appear to 

consume less energy, and thus appear 

more efficient, than an automatic 

termination-sensing dryer since the 

timer dryer test only allows for drying 

the test load to as low as 4-percent RMC, 

whereas the automatic cycle termination 

test would allow for drying the test load 

to any value below 6-percent RMC, 

including lower than 4-percent RMC. 

DOE reviewed EN Standard 61121, 

which defines ‘‘automatic tumble dryer,’’ 

as a dryer ‘‘which switches off the 

drying process when a certain RMC of 

the load is reached,’’ and ‘‘nonautomatic tumble dryer,’’ as a dryer 

‘‘which does not switch off the drying 

process when a certain RMC of the load 

is reached, usually controlled by a 

timer, but may also be manually 

controlled.’’ The testing procedures in 

section 9 of EN Standard 61121 require 

that, for automatic termination control 

dryers, a program is selected which 

achieves the final RMC value given in 

Table 3 in the test standard.23 The test 

standard adds additional clarification, 

stating that the test cycle be repeated 

using a different program if the program 

selected does not dry the test load to the 

specified RMC, and that if no program 

is available to dry the test load to the 

specified RMC, this fact is reported and 

the test is stopped. Section 9 of EN 

Standard 61121 also states that for nonautomatic (timer) dryers, the dryer is 

operated for as long as required to 

achieve the final RMC specified in Table 

3 in the test standard. The test standard 

adds that if the dryer does not reach the 

RMC after its maximum programmed 

time, this fact is reported and the test is 

stopped. DOE notes that although EN 

Standard 61121 provides descriptions of 

the test methods to use for each type of 

dryer, it does not provide any 

methodology to account for the energy 

consumed over- or under-drying the test 

load beyond a certain RMC for each type 

of dryer. According to the test 

procedures in EN Standard 61121, if the 

test load is dried to the same RMC, and 

therefore consumed the same amount of 

energy during the test cycle, a timer 

dryer and automatic termination control 

dryer would appear to consume the 

same amount of energy in real world 

use. 

DOE also reviewed AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 for potential amendments to the 

DOE test procedure to more properly 

account for automatic cycle termination. 

DOE noted that AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 provides similar definitions of 

types of dryers as provided by EN 

Standard 61121, including ‘‘manual 

dryer,’’ ‘‘timer dryer,’’ and ‘‘autosensing 

dryer.’’ In particular, AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 defines ‘‘autosensing dryer’’ as a 

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 

RMC of the load. AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 also provides that when the 

drying temperature can be chosen 

independently of the program of an 

autosensing dryer, it shall be set to the 

maximum. DOE also notes that the 

combined definitions of manual and 

timer dryer in AS/NZS Standard 2442.1 

are equivalent to the definition of ‘‘nonautomatic tumble dryer’’ in EN Standard 

61121. 

AS/NZS Standard 2442.1 provides 

separate testing methods for manual/ 

timer dryers and automatic termination 

control dryers, for which DOE noted the 

following differences. The manual/timer 

dryer test procedure requires that two 

test cycles be conducted. For the first 

test cycle, the dryer is operated until the 

RMC is greater than 6 percent and less 

than 7 percent. The test procedure is 

then repeated to obtain an RMC greater 

than 5 percent and less than 6 percent. 

In both cases, the test cycle is not 

allowed to advance into the cool-down 

period. From these results, the energy 

consumption required to obtain a final 

RMC of exactly 6 percent is linearly 

interpolated. The automatic termination 

control dryer test procedure requires 

that a drying program be selected to 

achieve a final RMC below 6 percent. 

The test cycle is run until immediately 

before the cool-down period begins. AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.1 allows for any 

final RMC value below 6 percent for 

automatic termination control dryers. If 

the RMC of the test load is above 6 

percent for such a dryer, the test is 

invalid and a new test is run with a 

different drying program setting. For the 

automatic termination control dryer test, 

the moisture removed from the load and 

the energy consumed to reach the 

measured final RMC are recorded. DOE 

notes that the automatic termination 

control dryer test procedure does not 

provide a calculation for determining 

the energy consumption to obtain a final 

RMC of exactly 6 percent, as is done in 

the timer dryer test procedure. 

AS/NZS Standard 2442.2 sets out the 

equations and procedures for 

calculating the values of the 

comparative energy consumption. The 

comparative energy consumption, 

which is determined through the 

projected annual energy consumption, 

includes an FU factor which accounts 

for the over-drying of clothes by 

manual/timer dryers. According to AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.2, the FU factor is 

equal to 1.1 for manual/timer controlled 

dryers and 1.0 for automatic termination 

control dryers; these values were 

estimated from research obtained in the 

United States. DOE notes that the AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.2 also provides a 

calculation for the ‘‘tested energy 

performance,’’ which is the tested 

energy consumption divided by the 

mass of moisture removed. However, 

DOE notes that AS/NZS Standard 

2442.2 only uses this value as a check, 

requiring only that the tested energy 

performance be less than 1.36 kilowatt 

hour (kWh) per kilogram (kg) of 

moisture removed. Therefore, DOE 

believes that for autosensing dryers the 

calculation for the comparative energy 

consumption, which is independent of 

the tested energy performance, takes 

into consideration the amount of energy 

consumed over-drying the test load 

below 6-percent RMC during the test 

cycle by simply adding this energy 

consumption to the overall annual 

energy consumption. 

DOE was made aware in discussions 

with an Australian clothes dryer 

manufacturer that the 1.1 FU factor for 

timer dryers in the calculation of 

comparative energy consumption in AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.2 was questioned in 

the past by interested parties involved 

in the development of Australia/New 

Zealand testing standards as possibly 

being too low. However, DOE was 

informed that limited studies were 

conducted by interested parties that 

showed that this value was still 

appropriate, and, therefore, DOE is not 

proposing a different FU factor for timer 

dryers. As discussed later in this 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37615 

section, DOE is requesting comment on 

the FU factor for timer dryers. 

DOE notes that appendix E of AS/NZS 

Standard 2442.1 provides specifications 

for the preparation of the standard damp 

test load, in which the load is soaked in 

a clothes washer for 10 minutes and 

then the water is extracted by a normal 

spin operation to reduce the RMC of the 

test load to between 85 and 90 percent. 

This process is similar to the test load 

preparation outlined in the DOE test 

procedure (with different RMC values 

and soaking times). However, AS/NZS 

Standard 2442.1 then requires that a 

final mass adjustment be made, such 

that the initial RMC of the test load is 

90 percent (190 percent ± 0.02 kg of the 

bone dry weight) by adding water 

uniformly to the load in a very fine 

spray. Although AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 requires a much higher RMC 

than is representative of actual clothes 

washer loads, DOE still believes that the 

final mass adjustments to achieve a 

more exact initial RMC in AS/NZS 

Standard 2442.1 would improve the 

repeatability and help to reduce 

variation from test to test. DOE believes 

this would also allow for a more 

representative comparison (without the 

use of RMC correction factors for 

automatic termination control dryers 

based on limited test data) between 

timer dryers and automatic termination 

control dryers. 

DOE believes that AS/NZS Standard 

2442 provides testing methods and 

procedures which accounts for the 

amount of over-drying associated with 

automatic termination control dryers 

beyond a specified RMC, and effectively 

takes into consideration the accuracy of 

different automatic termination sensor 

technologies. DOE also believes that the 

testing methods provide an accurate and 

representative method for comparing 

the energy consumption between timer 

dryers and automatic termination 

control dryers. For these reasons DOE 

proposes to amend the DOE test 

procedure for clothes dryers to 

incorporate the individual test 

procedures for timer dryers and 

automatic termination control dryers in 

AS/NZS Standard 2442 with 

modifications as appropriate for the 

DOE test procedure. The following 

discussion describes the proposed 

amendments. 

Based on the definitions in EN 

Standard 61121 and AS/NZS Standard 

2442, DOE proposes to define ‘‘timer 

dryer’’ as ‘‘a dryer which can be preset 

to carry out at least one sequence of 

operations to be terminated by a timer, 

but may also be manually controlled,’’ 

and ‘‘automatic termination control 

dryer’’ as ‘‘a 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 shall be 

tested as an automatic termination 

control dryer.’’ 

For the reasons discussed above, DOE 

proposes to amend sections 2.7.1, 

‘‘Compact size dryer load,’’ and 2.7.2, 

‘‘Standard size dryer load,’’ of the DOE 

test procedure for clothes dryers, which 

contain provisions for test load 

preparation, to add at the end of both 

sections the following requirement: 

‘‘Make a final mass adjustment, such 

that the moisture content is 47 percent 

± 0.33 percent by adding water 

uniformly to the load in a very fine 

spray.’’ The ± 0.33 percent allowable 

RMC range was determined based upon 

the allowable range specified in AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.1 (190 percent ± 

0.02 kg of the bone dry weight) for a 7- 

lb test load. DOE is also proposing that 

the procedure for dampening and 

extracting water from the test load 

specified in the current test procedure 

be changed to require that the moisture 

content of the test load be between 42 

and 47 percent of the bone-dry weight 

of the test load, and would serve as an 

initial preparation step prior to the final 

mass adjustments to obtain a test load 

with an RMC of 47 percent proposed 

above. DOE notes that it is proposing to 

use a nominal initial RMC of 47 percent 

based on the proposed amendment to 

change the initial RMC from 70 percent 

to 47 percent, as discussed in section 

III.C.5.b. If DOE does not adopt this 

proposed amendment to change the 

nominal initial RMC, it would propose 

for the above mentioned amendment to 

first prepare the test load to 65- to 70- 

percent RMC and make adjustments to 

the moisture content to get 70-percent ± 

0.33-percent initial RMC. 

DOE also notes that section 2.7 of the 

existing clothes dryer test procedure 

regarding test load preparation requires 

that the test load be agitated in water 

whose temperature is 100° ± 5 °F. DOE 

recognizes that some residential clothes 

washers may use a default cold rinse 

cycle at the end of the wash cycle, 

which sections 2.6.1.2.1 and 2.6.3.1 of 

the current DOE clothes washer test 

procedure specifies to be 60° ± 5 °F. 

However, DOE does not have any data 

indicating whether a different water 

temperature for clothes dryer test load 

preparation would be more 

representative of current consumer 

usage habits. For this reason, DOE is not 

proposing any changes to the water 

temperature for clothes dryer test load 

preparation at this time. If consumer 

usage data is made available that 

indicates a 60° ± 5 °F water temperature 

is more representative of consumer 

usage, DOE may adopt an alternate 

approach specifying a 60° ± 5 °F water 

temperature for test load preparation in 

section 2.7 of the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure. DOE invites comment on 

whether the existing water temperature 

of 100° ± 5 °F for test load preparation 

in the existing test procedure is 

representative of consumer usage habits, 

and, if not, what would be a 

representative value. In addition, DOE is 

unaware of how changes to the water 

temperature for clothes dryer test load 

preparation would affect the measured 

efficiency as compared to the existing 

test procedure. For this reason, DOE 

also requests data quantifying how 

changes to the water temperature for 

clothes dryer test load preparation 

would affect the measured efficiency as 

compared to the existing DOE test 

procedure, in particular for those units 

that are minimally compliant with 

current energy conservation standards. 

DOE also proposes to amend section 

3.3, ‘‘Test cycle,’’ in the DOE test 

procedure for clothes dryers to include 

testing procedures specific to each type 

of dryer. For timer dryers, the clothes 

dryer shall be operated at the maximum 

temperature setting and, if equipped 

with a timer, at the maximum time 

setting. The load shall be dried to 5–6 

percent RMC without the dryer 

advancing into cool down, resetting the 

timer if necessary. The procedure would 

then be repeated until the RMC of the 

test load is 4–5 percent. DOE requests 

comment on whether using the 

maximum temperature setting is 

representative of current consumer 

usage habits. DOE also requests 

comment on whether multiple 

temperature settings should be 

evaluated and averaged, and if so, how 

testing multiple temperature settings 

would affect the measured efficiency as 

compared to the existing DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure, which only 

measures the clothes dryer at the 

maximum temperature setting. 

As part of the energy conservation 

standards rulemaking preliminary 

analyses, DOE conducted testing on a 

representative gas clothes dryer. To 

support the evaluation of the testing 

methods for automatic termination 

control dryers, DOE conducted 

additional testing on this gas clothes 

dryer to evaluate the effects of program 

settings that provide the maximum 

drying temperature and maximum 

dryness level (i.e., lowest final RMC). 

DOE selected these settings to remain 

consistent with the current DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure, which specifies 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37616 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

that the maximum temperature setting 

be selected for the test cycle. The tests 

consisted of running the clothes dryer 

on the cycle settings discussed above 

with test load initial RMCs of 70 percent 

± 0.33 percent, 56 percent ± 0.33 

percent, and 47 percent ± 0.33 percent, 

and allowing the clothes dryer to run 

until the heater cycles off for the the 

final time (i.e., immediately before the 

cool-down period begins). For each 

initial RMC, three identical tests were 

conducted to determine the 

repeatability of the test results. Table 0.5 

below shows the results from this 

testing compared to the results of testing 

the same gas dryer according to the 

current DOE test prcocedure. 

TABLE 0.5—DOE AUTOMATIC CYCLE TERMINATION TEST RESULTS

Initial RMC 

(%) Test Final RMC (%) 

Per-cycle energy 

consumption 

(kWh) 

70 ......................................................................... Automatic Cycle Termination .............................. 0.6 3 .018 

Current DOE ........................................................ * 3.3 * 2 .462 

56 ......................................................................... Automatic Cycle Termination .............................. 0.6 2 .559 

Current DOE ........................................................ * 3.7 * 2 .001 

47 ......................................................................... Automatic Cycle Termination .............................. 0.5 2 .252 

Current DOE ........................................................ * 3.4 * 1 .754 

* Current DOE test procedure normalizes the per-cycle energy consumption equation to represent the energy consumption required to dry the 

test load to 4-percent RMC. In addition, the current DOE test procedure multiplies the per-cycle energy consumption by a fixed field use factor of 

1.04 to account for over-drying energy consumption. 

DOE noted that for all of the test runs, 

using the maximum temperature and 

dryness level settings resulted in the test 

load being dried to near bone dry (0.4- 

percent to 0.7-percent RMC). Using the 

data of the estimated RMC of the test 

load measured continuously during the 

test cycle, as discussed below, DOE also 

observed that for all of the test runs, the 

estimated RMC of the test load was 

below 1-percent RMC by the time the 

heater began cycling on/off. The 

increased amount of over-drying 

resulted in higher energy consumption, 

greater than the per-cycle energy 

consumption resulting from the same 

dryer being tested according to the DOE 

test procedure, which uses a fixed FU 

factor to account for over-drying energy 

consumption. DOE believes that 

different manufacturers may target 

different final RMCs for their highest 

dryness level setting. Based on the test 

results for this gas clothes dryer unit, 

DOE believes that the highest dryness 

level setting may be intended to dry the 

clothes load to near bone dry, beyond 

the target RMC of the DOE test 

procedure, and would not be 

appropriate for the proposed test cycle. 

For this reason, DOE does not intend to 

propose that the highest dryness level 

be specified for the test cycle. DOE 

believes that a ‘‘normal’’ drying program 

would be more representative of 

consumer usage habits and would more 

likely dry the clothes load to the target 

range specified in the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure. 

Based on additional testing, DOE is 

proposing an alternative approach in 

which, for automatic termination 

control dryers, a ‘‘normal’’ program shall 

be selected for the test cycle to be most 

representative of consumer usage. 

Where the drying temperature can be 

chosen independently of the program, it 

shall be set to the maximum. When the 

heater switches off for the final time at 

the end of the drying cycle, i.e., 

immediately before the cool-down 

period begins, the dryer shall be 

stopped. If the final RMC is greater than 

5 percent, the tests shall be invalid and 

a new run shall be conducted using the 

highest dryness level setting. Any test 

cycle in which the final RMC is 5 

percent or less shall be considered 

valid. DOE is also proposing that for 

automatic termination control dryers, 

the cycle setting selected for the test be 

recorded. This would include settings 

such as the drying mode, dryness level, 

and temperature level. DOE requests 

comment on whether proposed cycle 

and settings are representative of 

current consumer usage habits. DOE 

also requests comment on whether 

multiple cycles and settings should be 

tested and how the results from those 

multiple tests should be evaluated, and 

if so, how testing multiple cycles and 

settings would affect the measured 

efficiency as compared to the existing 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure, which 

only requires that the clothes dryer be 

tested at the maximum temperature 

setting. 

DOE notes that AS/NZS Standard 

2442 specifies the maximum allowable 

final RMC for automatic termination 

control dryers as 6 percent. DOE, 

however, is unaware of any data 

indicating that a final RMC of 6 percent 

would be representative of current 

consumer usage habits. DOE also notes 

that using 5-percent RMC, as proposed 

in today’s SNOPR, would remain within 

the range specified by the current DOE 

test procedure, which specifies 2.5- to 5- 

percent final RMC. DOE seeks comment 

and consumer usage data on whether a 

6-percent final RMC target value would 

be more representative of current 

consumer usage habits. DOE also notes 

that AS/NZS Standard 2442 requires an 

initial RMC of 90 percent. As noted in 

section III.C.5.b, DOE researched 

appropriate initial RMC values based on 

clothes washer shipment-weighted 

average RMC, and believes that a value 

of 47-percent RMC would be most 

representative of clothes loads being 

dried after completion of a residential 

clothes washer cycle. 

DOE notes that there are at least two 

ways to terminate the drying cycle 

during the test: (1) Termination before 

cool-down, or (2) termination at the end 

of the selected test cycle, including 

cool-down. As discussed above, section 

4.2 of AS/NZS Standard 2442.1 requires 

that for automatic termination control 

dryers, the programmed test cycle be 

run until immediately before the cooldown period begins. Similarly, section 

4.5.1 of AHAM–HLD–1–2009 requires 

that the automatic termination control 

dryer test cycle not be permitted to 

advance into the cool-down period. 

Alternatively, section 9.2.1 of EN 

Standard 61121 requires that the 

selected test cycle program be allowed 

to run until completion, including the 

cool-down period. Today’s SNOPR 

proposes automatic cycle termination 

based on the provisions in AS/NZS 

Standard 2442 because it provides a 

more representative comparison of the 

energy consumption between automatic 

termination control dryers and timer 

dryers than EN Standard 61121. In 

addition, the proposed amendments to 

stop the test cycle immediately before 

the cool-down period will harmonize 

DOE test methods with industry and 

international test standards. However, 

DOE is considering the alternative 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37617 

24The clothes dryer would also consume energy 

to spin the drum during the cool-down period that 

is currently not accounted for by the DOE test 

procedure. 

25A summary of this testing is available in the 

preliminary technical support document for the 

residential clothes dryer energy conservation 

standards rulemaking and can be found online at 

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

appliance_standards/residential/ 

clothes_dryers.html. 

26The AHAM 8-lb test load is made up of the 

following mixed cotton items, which are intended 

to represent clothes items regularly laundered: 2 

sheets, 1 table cloth, 2 shirts, 3 bath towels, 2 ‘‘T’’ 

shirts, 2 pillow cases, 3 shorts, 1 wash cloth, 2 

handkerchiefs. 

method of section 9.2.1 of EN Standard 

61121 because it may provide incentives 

for energy-saving improvements in 

dryer controls. DOE recognizes that 

manufacturers may design products to 

use the residual heat during the cooldown period (i.e., immediately after the 

heater has switched off for the final 

time) to continue to dry the clothes load 

while slowly spinning the drum to 

achieve a desired RMC.24 DOE 

recognizes that inclusion of the cooldown period may make it possible for 

some manufacturers to design dryers 

that attain the desired RMC with lower 

total energy consumption. This 

potential for energy efficiency 

improvement would not be captured by 

the test methods proposed in today’s 

SNOPR. In order to capture this realworld energy savings potential 

associated with the additional drying 

using residual heat during the cooldown period, DOE could adopt an 

alternate approach to include the 

measurement of the cool-down period 

as part of the proposed automatic cycle 

termination test methodology. Under an 

alternate approach, section 3.3.2 of the 

test procedure for automatic termination 

control dryers, instead of specifying that 

‘‘when the heater switches off for the 

final time, immediately before the cooldown period begins, stop the dryer,’’ 

would specify to ‘‘run the clothes dryer 

until the programmed cycle has 

terminated.’’ DOE also notes that the 

inclusion or exclusion of the cool-down 

period under the proposed test method 

would not affect the ability to compare 

energy consumption test results 

between automatic termination control 

dryers and timer dryers in DOE’s clothes 

dryer test procedure. DOE welcomes 

comment on whether the cool-down 

period should be included as part of the 

active mode test cycle for automatic 

termination control dryers. DOE is 

unaware of data showing the effects of 

including the cool-down period on the 

measured efficiency as compared to the 

existing test procedure. For this reason, 

DOE also welcomes data quantifying 

how including the cool-down period in 

the test cycle would affect the measured 

efficiency of clothes dryers as compared 

to the existing DOE test procedure, in 

particular for those units that are 

minimally compliant with current 

energy conservation standards. 

Finally, DOE proposes to revise 

section 4, ‘‘Calculation of Derived 

Results from Test Measurements,’’ of the 

DOE test procedure. DOE proposes to 

revise the FU factor credits in the 

current DOE test procedure to more 

appropriately account for automatic 

termination control dryers’ over-drying 

energy consumption. Automatic 

termination control clothes dryers 

would receive an FU factor of 1.0 

(instead of the 1.04 currently provided), 

with any over-drying energy 

consumption being added to the drying 

energy consumption to decrement EF. 

Based on the proposed test methods, an 

automatic termination control dryer that 

is able to dry the test load to close to 

5-percent RMC, and thus minimize 

over-drying, would result in a higher 

measured efficiency than if it over-dried 

the test load to an RMC less than 5 

percent. The energy consumed overdrying the test load would be included 

in the per-cycle energy consumption, 

and would result in a reduction in the 

measured EF. For timer dryers, DOE is 

proposing to use the results from the 

proposed test cycles (5–6 and 4–5 

percent final RMCs) to interpolate the 

value of the per-cycle energy 

consumption required to dry the test 

load to exactly 5-percent RMC. DOE 

invites comment on whether such 

methodology appropriately credits both 

automatic termination control and timer 

clothes dryers. 

DOE is unaware of any data or studies 

that would indicate that the 1.18 FU 

factor credit for timer dryers (to account 

for over- or under-drying test loads in 

real-world use) is inaccurate and not 

currently representative of consumer 

usage habits. For this reason, DOE does 

not intend to revise the 1.18 FU factor 

credit for timer dryers at this time. 

However, DOE recognizes that this field 

use factor for timer dryers was 

established at the same time the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure was 

established, in 1981, and may not be 

representative of current consumer 

usage patterns. DOE is open to revising 

this value and welcomes data and 

comment on whether this value is 

appropriate. 

In support of the residential clothes 

dryer energy conservation standards 

rulemaking, DOE conducted testing of 

ten vented clothes dryers and two ventless clothes dryers (one of which was 

not an automatic termination control 

dryer) at an independent testing 

laboratory.25 As part of this testing, DOE 

conducted a limited number of 

preliminary automatic cycle termination 

tests in order to analyze the various 

automatic termination technologies 

found in DOE’s sample of selected 

dryers. DOE selected the AHAM 8-lb 

test load 26 instead of the 7-lb load 

specified in the DOE test procedure for 

standard-size clothes dryers in order to 

lengthen the test cycle times and better 

evaluate the function of the dryer 

controls as the test load approached low 

RMCs. The independent test lab 

conducting the clothes dryer tests used 

a data acquisition system to monitor 

estimated RMC of the test load 

continuously during the test cycle. The 

system used a platform weighing scale, 

along with an algorithm to account for 

buoyancy effects of hot air in the dryer, 

drum rotational effects, and other 

proprietary factors. With this data, DOE 

was able to estimate when the test load 

reached a certain RMC and how much 

energy was associated with over-drying 

for RMCs beyond that point. However, 

for the vent-less clothes dryer, the test 

lab was unable to accurately monitor the 

estimated RMC of the test load 

continuously to analyze over-drying 

because the moisture removed from the 

clothes load remained inside the dryer 

cabinet until a drain pump removed it, 

in contrast to vented dryers in which 

the moisture-laden air exits the dryer 

cabinet through the exhaust pipe. 

Therefore, the scale weight 

measurement used to calculate the 

estimated RMC was not meaningful for 

the vent-less units. 

The automatic termination tests 

conducted by DOE consisted of running 

the test cycle in a user-programmable 

automatic termination mode and 

allowing the dryer to self-terminate the 

drying cycle using the various automatic 

termination sensor technologies. DOE 

monitored the energy consumption and 

estimated RMC of the test load during 

the test cycle from the starting time at 

70-percent initial RMC to the time when 

the heater last cycled off (i.e., 

immediately before the cool-down 

period). The specific focus was on 

analyzing the amount of over-drying 

energy consumed drying the test load to 

less than 5-percent RMC. DOE also 

applied a correction factor to the test 

data to account for the fact that the 

automatic cycle termination tests used 

the AHAM 8-lb test load instead of the 

DOE 7-lb test load. For a test reducing 

the nominal RMC of the test load from 

an initial 70 percent to a final 5 percent, 

an 8-lb test load would require 5.2 lb of 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37618 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

water to be removed during the test 

cycle, whereas a 7-lb test load would 

only require 4.6 lb of water to be 

removed. Because the automatic cycle 

termination tests with the AHAM 8-lb 

test load would consume more energy to 

dry the greater amount of water in the 

test load, DOE developed a correction 

factor by comparing the rates of energy 

consumption per nominal percent RMC 

reduced between the automatic cycle 

termination test, and the tests 

conducted according to the current DOE 

test procedure. 

Figure 0.1 shows the over-drying 

energy consumption versus the final 

RMC for a number of different units 

tested, and, in some cases, different 

cycle settings. DOE noted that some of 

the tested units stopped the test cycle at 

or higher than 5-percent RMC, thereby 

not producing over-drying. For the 

remaining tests, the data show that overdrying the test load to lower final RMCs 

requires higher energy consumption, 

with a slightly exponential trend likely 

because it becomes more difficult to 

remove the final small amounts of 

moisture remaining in the test load. 

DOE did not observe any apparent 

relationship between the type of 

automatic cycle termination sensor 

technology used and the amount of 

over-drying. However, these tests were 

conducted using different testing 

methods than the methods proposed in 

today’s SNOPR (e.g., various automatic 

cycle termination settings). Therefore, 

DOE was unable to determine whether 

one type of sensor technology is more 

accurate, and thus more effective at 

preventing over-drying. 

Figure 0.2 presents the data from one 

of the test runs for a vented baseline 

electric standard dryer, showing the 

cumulative energy consumption as the 

test load is dried. DOE observed that for 

this clothes dryer, the energy 

consumption versus the estimated RMC 

in the range of 70 percent to 10 percent 

shows a linear relationship. However, 

there appears to be an exponential trend 

when comparing the RMC below 5 

percent to the over-drying energy 

consumption, with a significant increase 

in over-drying energy consumption 

when the RMC of the test load reaches 

approximately 3 percent or less. DOE 

observed these same trends in most of 

the other clothes dryers tested. As 

discussed above, this non-linearity at 

low RMC likely occurs because it 

becomes more difficult to remove the 

lesser amounts of moisture remaining in 

the test load. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP29JN10.015</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37619 

Because DOE had not yet developed 

the proposed test procedure for 

automatic cycle termination at the time 

that this testing was conducted, test 

conditions different than those 

proposed in the test procedure 

amendments were used; i.e., various 

automatic cycle termination settings 

were applied to achieve the low RMCs, 

and an 8-lb AHAM test load comprising 

different materials and articles of 

clothing was used. Therefore, the testing 

results may not be representative of the 

results obtained when using the 

proposed automatic cycle termination 

testing methods. 

DOE also analyzed how the proposed 

changes to the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure, discussed above, would 

affect the measured EF of residential 

clothes dryers, as required by EPCA. 

EPCA also requires that DOE must 

determine how the EF of clothes dryers 

which are minimally compliant would 

be affected by the amendments to the 

test procedure, and based on this, 

amend the energy conservation 

standards as appropriate. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(e)) As part of DOE’s preliminary 

analyses for the energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for clothes dryers, 

DOE concluded that all clothes dryers 

currently available on the U.S. market 

that are covered under the current 

energy conservation standards are 

equipped with some form of automatic 

cycle termination sensing. Therefore, 

DOE analyzed, as discussed in the 

paragraphs below, how the proposed 

changes to the clothes dryer test 

procedure would affect the measured EF 

of residential clothes dryers according 

to the test procedure for automatic 

termination control dryers. 

Because DOE is changing the FU 

credit from 1.04 to 1.0 for automatic 

termination control dryers, a dryer 

which has an automatic cycle 

termination setting that is capable of 

drying the test load to very close to 5- 

percent RMC, and therefore had little 

over-drying energy consumption, would 

receive a 4-percent credit in EF 

compared to the current DOE test 

procedure. DOE also notes that because 

the proposed test procedure requires the 

test load to be dried to a target final 

RMC of 5 percent (or lower), the 

measured energy consumption would 

decrease and EF increase if the target 

RMC of 5 percent is achieved (no overdrying), as compared to the current DOE 

test procedure which uses a correction 

factor in order to determine the energy 

consumption required to dry the test 

load to a final RMC of 4 percent. As 

discussed below for timer dryers, based 

on the differences in the calculations of 

per-cycle energy consumption using a 

starting RMC of 47 percent, if the target 

final RMC of 5 percent is achieved, DOE 

believes that the EF would increase by 

about 2.4 percent using the proposed 

test procedure as compared to the 

current DOE test procedure. 

DOE believes that a clothes dryer 

which is minimally compliant with 

current energy conservation standards 

would likely use a less accurate 

automatic termination control system, 

and that such a dryer would possibly 

over-dry the test load below 5-percent 

RMC, such that the energy consumption 

and measured EF would be equivalent 

to that measured by the existing DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure. For this 

reason, DOE does not believe that any 

changes to the current energy 

conservation standards as a result of the 

proposed amendments to the test 

procedure to account for automatic 

cycle termination would be warranted. 

However, DOE welcomes comment on 

this tentative conclusion, as well as test 

data of minimally compliant clothes 

dryers tested according to the proposed 

automatic termination control dryer test 

procedure to determine whether 

changes to the current energy 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP29JN10.016</GPH>
37620 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

27The correction factor in the current test 

procedure normalizes the measured energy 

consumption to represent the energy consumption 

required to dry the test load from 70-percent initial 

RMC to 4-percent final RMC. As discussed in 

section III.C.5.b, DOE is proposing to change the 

initial RMC from 70 to 47 percent. DOE has 

considered the effects of changing the initial RMC 

from 70 to 47 percent on the measured EF in section 

III.C.5.b. 

28This is a typical approach for combination 

washer/dryers, which wash and dry a load in the 

same drum. 

29 DOE’s alternate test procedure for vent-less 

dryers was described in the LG Petition for Waiver. 

conservation standards for dryers would 

be warranted. 

The proposed test procedure for timer 

dryers would provide the energy 

consumption required to dry the test 

load from 47-percent RMC to 5-percent 

RMC. DOE notes that the 5-percent final 

RMC falls within the range of RMC 

specified by the current test procedure 

(2.5–5 percent final RMC). However, in 

the current DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure, the per-cycle energy 

consumption calculation contains a 

correction factor which is intended to 

normalize the measured energy 

consumption to represent the energy 

consumption required to dry the test 

load to 4-percent RMC.27 Because the 

proposed test procedure for timer dryers 

would measure the energy consumption 

to reach a final RMC of only 5 percent, 

the energy consumption would be 

lower, and EF higher, as compared to 

the current DOE test procedure, which 

measures the energy consumption to 

reach a final RMC of 4 percent. Based 

on the differences in the calculations of 

per-cycle energy consumption, DOE 

believes that the EF would increase by 

about 2.4 percent using the proposed 

test procedure as compared to the 

current DOE test procedure, assuming 

that an initial RMC of 47 percent would 

be used in both cases. However, because 

DOE is unaware of any clothes dryers 

controlled only by a timer currently on 

the U.S. market, as noted above, DOE 

does not intend to revise the current 

energy conservation standards based on 

the proposed amendments to the test 

procedure. 

3. Test Procedure for Vent-Less Clothes 

Dryers 

DOE noted in the October 2007 

Framework Document that a potential 

limitation of the clothes dryer test 

procedure had been identified for ventless dryers, which includes condensing 

clothes dryers and combination washer/ 

dryers. (Framework Document, STD No. 

1 at p. 5) Manufacturers of vent-less 

clothes dryers commented that the 

current clothes dryer test procedure is 

unable to test this type of clothes dryer. 

Vent-less clothes dryers do not vent 

exhaust air to the outside as a 

conventional dryer does. Instead, they 

typically use ambient air in a heat 

exchanger to cool the hot, humid air 

inside the appliance, thereby 

condensing out the moisture. 

Alternatively, cold water can be used in 

the heat exchanger to condense the 

moisture from the air in the drum.28 In 

either case, the dry air exiting the drum 

is reheated and recirculated in a closed 

loop. Thus, there is no moisture-laden 

exhaust air to vent outside, only a 

wastewater stream that either can be 

collected in an included water container 

or discharged down the household 

drain. However, the process of 

condensing out the moisture in the 

recirculated air results in higher energy 

consumption than a conventional dryer, 

and it can significantly increase the 

ambient room temperature. 

Manufacturers of condensing clothes 

dryers have, in the past, applied for 

waivers from the DOE test procedure for 

these products on the basis that the test 

procedure did not contain provisions for 

vent-less clothes dryers. On November 

15, 2005, LG filed an Application for 

Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver 

from the clothes dryer test procedure for 

its condensing dryer model because it 

asserted that the current clothes dryer 

test procedure applies only to vented 

clothes dryers. The current test 

procedure requires the use of an exhaust 

restrictor to simulate the backpressure 

effects of a vent tube in an installed 

condition. Condenser dryers do not 

have exhaust vents as they recirculate 

rather than exhaust the process air. LG 

further stated that DOE’s test procedure 

for clothes dryers provides no definition 

or mention of condensing clothes 

dryers. LG also noted that it knew of no 

other test procedure that would rate its 

condensing dryer products. 

On August 23, 2006, DOE published 

the LG Petition for Waiver. 71 FR 49437. 

In that notice, DOE presented an 

alternate test procedure for vent-less 

dryers to address the potential 

limitation of the clothes dryer test 

procedure. 71 FR 49437, 49439.29 The 

alternate test procedure consisted of 

adding separate definitions for a 

‘‘conventional clothes dryer’’ (which is 

vented) and a ‘‘condensing clothes 

dryer’’ (which is a vent-less design). 

Further, the alternate test procedure 

presented in the LG Petition for Waiver 

qualified the requirement for an exhaust 

simulator so that it would only apply to 

conventional clothes dryers. In that 

notice, DOE stated that it is seeking 

comment on the proposed modification 

to the test procedure. In response, 

Whirlpool submitted a comment 

agreeing with the alternate test 

procedure, although it recommended 

clarifications to DOE’s proposed 

definitions. 73 FR 66641, 66642 (Nov. 

10, 2008). On November 10, 2008, DOE 

approved the LG Petition for Waiver and 

determined that LG should not be 

required to rate or test the subject 

clothes dryer model according to the 

existing test procedure. The notice did 

not include further rulemaking actions 

on the presented alternate test 

procedure. 73 FR 66641. 

Under DOE’s regulations for petitions 

for waiver from the energy conservation 

program, codified in 10 CFR 430.27(m), 

DOE is required to publish a NOPR 

within 1 year of the granting of any 

waiver. The NOPR would propose 

amending its regulations to eliminate 

any need for continuation of the waiver. 

DOE is required to subsequently publish 

a final rule as soon thereafter as 

practicable. The waiver would then 

terminate on the effective date of the 

final rule. Publication of this SNOPR 

addressing, in part, test procedures for 

vent-less clothes dryers, would satisfy 

these regulatory requirements for the LG 

waiver. 

DOE notes that there are currently no 

existing Federal energy conservation 

standards for vent-less clothes dryers. In 

the October 2007 Framework Document, 

DOE stated that it intended to analyze 

potential energy conservation standards 

for vent-less clothes dryers. In 

particular, DOE proposed to analyze 

vent-less clothes dryers as a separate 

product class, recognizing the unique 

utility that vent-less clothes dryers 

offers to consumers (the ability to be 

installed in conditions in which vented 

clothes dryers would be precluded due 

to venting restrictions). DOE proposed 

to analyze two product classes for ventless clothes dryers: (1) Vent-less electric 

compact (240V) clothes dryers, and (2) 

electric combination washer/dryers. 

DOE also requested comment in the 

October 2007 Framework Document on 

the alternate test procedure for vent-less 

clothes dryers proposed in the LG 

Petition for Waiver. 

ALS and CEE both commented in 

response to the October 2007 

Framework Document in support of 

revising the clothes dryer test procedure 

to test vent-less clothes dryers. (ALS, 

STD No. 6 at p. 1; CEE, STD No. 10 at 

pp. 1–2) AHAM also supported 

including a provision to test vent-less 

clothes dryers, but added that a single 

procedure for vented and vent-less 

clothes dryers may not be applicable. 

(AHAM, STD No. 8 at p. 1) At the 

October 2007 public meeting, AHAM 

commented that adding ventless dryers 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37621 

to the test procedure is not as simple as 

closing a vent off, but may require a 

more significant change to appropriately 

measure energy use. AHAM added that 

it would work on developing such a test 

procedure for DOE to measure energy 

use. (AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, 

STD No. 4.6 at pp. 18–19) AHAM 

commented that the energy calculation 

for vent-less clothes dryers should take 

a more ‘‘holistic’’ approach than those 

for vented clothes dryers because ventless clothes dryers can have an effect on 

energy use outside of their system (i.e., 

impacts on HVAC loads). (AHAM, 

Public Meeting Transcript, STD No. 4.6 

at p. 51; AHAM, STD No. 8 at p. 3) 

Whirlpool commented that in light of 

increasing interest by manufacturers in 

offering vent-less clothes dryers in 

North America, it would work through 

AHAM to propose an appropriate test 

procedure. (Whirlpool, STD No. 7 at p. 

2) Whirlpool also noted that 

combination washer/dryers would 

require a unique test procedure, and 

that DOE should weigh the effort to 

create such a test procedure against the 

potential for energy savings from a 

product with very modest annual unit 

sales. (Whirlpool, STD No. 7 at p. 3) 

DOE notes that accounting for 

ambient space conditioning impacts 

would require significant changes to the 

current test procedure. According to 

EPCA, any test procedures prescribed or 

amended under this section shall be 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results which measure energy 

efficiency, energy use, water use, or 

estimated annual operating cost of a 

covered product during a representative 

average use cycle or period of use. (42 

U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) DOE believes that 

accounting for impacts on HVAC loads 

on energy use of a household would be 

beyond the scope of a test procedure to 

measure the energy use of a product, as 

prescribed by EPCA. DOE also notes 

that other DOE test procedures for 

products such as refrigerators, ovens, 

and water heaters which could impact 

HVAC loads, do not take into account 

these impacts on ambient space 

conditioning in the test procedure. DOE 

also notes that for the energy 

conservation standards rulemaking for 

water heaters, DOE considered the 

effects of heat pump water heaters on 

house heating loads as part of the 

energy-use characterization, and did not 

propose to amend the test procedure to 

account for such energy use. For these 

reasons, DOE is not proposing to amend 

the DOE clothes dryer test procedure to 

account for the ambient space 

conditioning impacts, but will consider 

such impacts as part of the concurrent 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking. 

In order to analyze potential energy 

conservation standards for vent-less 

clothes dryers, provisions must be 

added to the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure for measuring the energy 

efficiency performance in vent-less 

clothes dryers. Therefore, DOE 

determined to consider such 

amendments to its clothes dryer test 

procedure. DOE first examined the test 

procedure proposed as part of the LG 

Petition for Waiver. DOE conducted 

limited tests of vent-less clothes dryers 

at an independent testing laboratory 

according to those amendments. DOE 

tested one vent-less electric compact 

(240V) clothes dryer and one vent-less 

combination washer/dryer, conducting 

three test runs per unit. Table 0.6 shows 

the results from DOE’s tests. DOE 

observed no variation in EF from test to 

test within the precision of the proposed 

test procedure for the vent-less electric 

compact (240V) dryer, and less than 2- 

percent variation in EF from test to test 

for the vent-less combination washer/ 

dryer. Based on this limited testing, the 

proposed testing procedures appear to 

produce repeatable results. DOE 

welcomes additional test data for ventless clothes dryers tested according to 

the alternate test procedure presented in 

the LG Petition for Waiver, in particular 

to analyze the test-to-test variation for 

individual units tested multiple times. 

TABLE 0.6—DATA FROM DOE TESTING OF VENT-LESS CLOTHES DRYERS

Test run 

Energy factor 

(lb/kWh) 

Vent-less electric compact (240 V) Vent-less combination 

washer/dryer 

1 ............................................................................................................................................... 2.37 1.95 

2 ............................................................................................................................................... 2.37 1.96 

3 ............................................................................................................................................... 2.37 1.93 

In reviewing alternate test procedures 

for vent-less clothes dryers for potential 

amendments to the DOE test procedure, 

DOE also investigated testing conditions 

and methods specified in test standards 

used internationally. DOE is aware of 

international test standards for clothes 

dryers used in Europe, China, Australia, 

and New Zealand which include 

provisions for vent-less or condensing 

clothes dryers. 

DOE evaluated EN Standard 61121, 

and identified as relevant the test 

procedures for condensing (vent-less) 

clothes dryers, as well as certain test 

conditions which affect all clothes 

dryers. These test procedures provide 

greater specificity than the alternate test 

procedure presented in the LG Petition 

for Waiver, and details of the relevant 

sections of EN Standard 61121 are 

presented below. 

Section 3 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Definitions and symbols,’’ provides 

definitions for various types of dryers, 

including: 

‘‘3.1 

tumble dryer 

appliance in which textile material is dried 

by tumbling in a rotating drum, in which 

heated air is passed’’ 

‘‘3.2 

air vented tumble dryer 

tumble dryer with a fresh-air intake which is 

heated and passed over the textile 

material and where the resulting moist 

air is exhausted into the room or vented 

outside,’’ 

‘‘3.3 

condenser tumble dryer 

tumble dryer in which the air used for the 

drying process is dehumidified by 

cooling.’’ 

Section 6.1 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘General,’’ which addresses general 

conditions for measurements, provides 

in part the following conditions for 

dryer installation and, in particular, 

installation without an exhaust duct: 

‘‘The measurements shall be carried out on 

a tumble dryer installed and used in 

accordance with manufacturer’s instructions, 

except as required by this standard.’’ 

* * * * * 

‘‘Where the tumble dryer is intended for 

use without a duct (i.e., the tumble dryer is 

intended to be vented into the room), the 

tumble dryer shall be tested as supplied 

without a duct.’’ 

* * * * * 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37622 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

30Table 3 of EN Standard 61121 specifies the 

final moisture content of the test load after drying 

for ‘‘dry cotton’’ programme as 0 percent with an 

allowable range of ¥3 to +3 percent. 

31Whirlpool, 2007. ‘‘U.S Department of Energy 

Test Procedure Change for Condensing Clothes 

Dryers.’’ September 4, 2007. Docket No. EE–2007– 

BT–STD–0010, Comment Number 13. 

‘‘Where a manufacturer gives the option to 

use the tumble dryer both with and without 

a duct, the tumble dryer shall be tested 

without a duct.’’ 

Section 6.2.3 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Ambient temperature,’’ requires that 

the ambient temperature of the room in 

the vicinity of the dryer shall be 

maintained at 23 ± 2 degrees Celsius 

(°C) throughout the test. 

Section 9 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Performance tests,’’ provides the test 

procedures for performance tests of the 

main tumble dryer functions. In 

particular, section 9.1, ‘‘General,’’ states: 

* * * * * 

‘‘Tumble dryers shall be configured with or 

without a duct as specified in 6.1.’’ 

‘‘All tests shall be started with the tumble 

dryer at ambient temperature conditions 

according to 6.2.3.’’ 

Note: This can be done by leaving the 

machine at ambient conditions for at least 12 

h [hours]. 

Section 9.2.1 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Drying tests general,’’ which details the 

procedures for the drying test, provides in 

part the following: 

‘‘For automatic tumble dryers those 

programmes are selected which aim to 

achieve the final moisture values given 

in table 3.’’ 30

* * * * * 

‘‘The minimum number of valid 

cycles shall be five * * * If the dryer is 

automatically stopped during a cycle 

and the reason is that the condensation 

box is full of water, the fact is reported 

and the test is stopped.’’ 

‘‘Note: If the manufacturer gives the option 

to use a condenser tumble dryer both with or 

without condensation box, the dryer should 

be tested with the condensation box.’’ 

Section 9.2.1 also provides that water 

and energy consumption for the cycle 

shall be reported. The water 

consumption would be applicable to 

condensing clothes dryers which use 

water to condense moisture in the drum 

exhaust air. 

Section 10.3 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Water consumption,’’ provides for the 

calculation of the corrected test cycle 

water consumption corresponding to the 

nominal final RMC (specified in Table 

3 of EN Standard 61121). 

EN Standard 61121 also provides a 

method for measuring the efficiency of 

condensing moisture from the test load. 

Section 9.2.2 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Condensation efficiency,’’ states the 

following: 

‘‘The condensation efficiency for a 

condenser tumble dryer, shall be measured 

using the dry cotton programme and setting 

selected to achieve the ‘‘dry cotton’’ result 

(this means the equivalent timer setting for 

a timer dryer) in the drying test.’’ 

‘‘The mass of the test load is measured 

immediately before and after the cycle. The 

mass of the moisture condensed during the 

cycle and collected in the container is 

determined. The first cycle after a period of 

non-operation longer than 36 h shall not be 

used for evaluation.’’ 

‘‘During the time between two cycles the 

door of the tumble dryer shall be closed 

except for loading.’’ 

Section 10.5 of EN Standard 61121, 

‘‘Condensation efficiency,’’ subsequently 

provides the following methods and 

calculations for the condensation 

efficiency: 

‘‘Efficiency of condensation, C, is 

determined according to 9.2.2 as the ratio 

between the water produced during the cycle 

Ww, relative to the total mass of water 

evaporated from the load.’’ 

* * * * * 

‘‘Efficiency of condensation is the mean 

value of a minimum of four valid cycles.’’ 

‘‘Note: Due [to] this requirement the first 

run of a condensation efficiency test has 

normally to be discarded.’’ 

DOE notes that AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 also includes provisions for 

condensing clothes dryers. AS/NZS 

Standard 2442.1 states that the scope of 

the standard specifically includes 

condenser dryers and the dryer function 

of combination washer/dryers. Section 

1.4.4 of AS/NZS Standard 2442.1, 

‘‘Dryer types,’’ provides the following 

definitions for vented and condenser 

clothes dryers: 

‘‘Vented electric rotary clothes dryer—a 

clothes dryer in which air (usually heated) is 

passed through the load while it is being 

tumbled. The air and accumulated moisture 

is then discharged to the atmosphere.’’ 

‘‘Condenser electric rotary clothes dryer— 

a clothes dryer in which air (usually heated) 

is passed through the load while it is being 

tumbled. The moisture thus accumulated is 

then separated from the air within the dryer, 

converted to a liquid, and either drained or 

stored for later removal.’’ 

DOE notes that these definitions are 

essentially the same as those provided 

in EN Standard 61121. Both definitions 

state that the moisture in the air from 

the drying process is dehumidified, but 

AS/NZS Standard 2442.1 adds more 

detail providing that the liquid can 

either be drained or stored for later 

removal. Section 3.4 of AS/NZS 

Standard 2442.1, ‘‘Exhaust,’’ also 

provides the following exhaust 

conditions for installation, which DOE 

notes are very similar to those provided 

in EN Standard 61121, and provides 

conditions to cover all possible dryer 

configurations: 

‘‘3.4.3 Dryers with optional exhaust 

duct—Where a dryer is designed to operate 

with an optional exhaust duct, the dryer shall 

be tested without the duct fitted, in 

accordance with the manufacturer’s 

instructions for operating without a duct.’’ 

‘‘3.4.4 Dryers without exhaust duct— 

Where a dryer is designed solely to operate 

without an exhaust duct, the test shall be 

carried out in accordance with the 

recommendations of the manufacturer.’’ 

Similar to EN Standard 61121, AS/ 

NZS Standard 2442.1 provides that for 

condensing clothes dryers, as 

applicable, the volume of supply water 

consumed be recorded at the end of the 

test cycle. The test procedure also 

provides a calculation of the water 

consumption per test cycle (used to 

reach the specified final RMC). 

DOE also considered comments that 

Whirlpool submitted as part of the 

residential clothes dryer and room air 

conditioner energy conservation 

standards rulemaking, providing 

amendments to the DOE test procedure 

for clothes dryers to include methods 

for the testing of condensing dryers.31

These suggested amendments were 

largely based upon EN Standard 61121. 

Whirlpool stated that section 1 of the 

DOE test procedure for clothes dryers 

must incorporate definitions of an 

‘‘exhausted dryer,’’ ‘‘non-exhausted 

dryer,’’ and a ‘‘condensing dryer.’’ 

Whirlpool suggested the following 

definitions: 

‘‘An exhausted Dryer has a blower system 

which is intended to deliver the heated, 

moist air from the Drum cavity into a duct 

system external to the Dryer and this duct 

system is exhausted into the outdoors.’’ 

‘‘A non-exhausted Dryer is intended to be 

used without an external duct system and 

has no provision to connect to such a duct 

system.’’ 

‘‘A condensing Dryer is a non-exhausted 

tumble Dryer in which the air used for the 

drying process is dehumidified by using 

room ambient air for cooling. The blower 

system used for circulating room ambient air 

is independent of the heated moist air from 

the Drum cavity.’’ 

(Whirlpool, STD No. 13 at p. 20). 

Whirlpool also stated that section 2.1 

of the DOE test procedure for clothes 

dryers must be updated to include nonexhausted dryers. Whirlpool proposed 

that ‘‘[w]here the tumble Dryer is 

defined as a non-exhausted Dryer and is 

intended for use without a duct [t]he 

tumble Dryer shall be tested as supplied 

without a duct,’’ and that ‘‘[w]here the 

tumble Dryer is defined as an exhausted 

Dryer and is intended for use with a 

duct [t]he Dryer exhaust shall be 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37623 

restricted by adding the AHAM exhaust 

simulator described in 3.3.5 of [AHAM 

Standard HLD–1–2009].’’ Id. 

With regard to the pre-conditioning 

cycle in section 2.8 of the DOE test 

procedure for clothes dryers, Whirlpool 

proposed that, in order to align with the 

European energy procedure, the DOE 

test procedure should incorporate the 

following condensing dryer preconditioning cycle: ‘‘For condensing 

Dryers, the Dryer steady state 

temperature must be equal to ambient 

room temperature according to 2.2 

before the start of all test runs. Note: this 

can be done by leaving the machine at 

ambient room conditions for at least (12) 

hours between tests but not more than 

(36) hours between tests.’’ Id. at 21. In 

addition, Whirlpool stated that in order 

to align with the European energy 

procedure and for consistency in 

results, the DOE test procedure should 

incorporate the following condenser 

dryer test procedure steps: 

‘‘If the manufacturer gives the option to use 

a condensing tumble Dryer both with or 

without condensation box, the Dryer shall be 

tested with the condensation box.’’ 

‘‘If the Dryer is automatically stopped 

during a cycle and the reason is that the 

condensation box is full of water, the test is 

stopped, and the run is invalid.’’ 

‘‘During the time between two cycles, the 

door of the tumble Dryer shall be closed 

except for loading.’’ 

‘‘The first cycle after a period of nonoperation longer than (36) hours shall not be 

used for evaluation.’’ 

‘‘Results from the first test run on an 

unused (dry) condensing Dryer are invalid 

and cannot be used for the energy efficiency 

calculations.’’ 

‘‘The Condenser unit of the Dryer must 

remain in place and not be taken out of the 

Dryer for any reason between tests.’’ 

Id. at 22. 

After review of the definitions 

detailed in EN Standard 61121 (section 

3), AS/NZS Standard 2442.1 (section 

1.4), and Whirlpool’s proposed 

amendments to the DOE test procedure, 

DOE concludes that the definitions of 

‘‘conventional clothes dryer’’ and 

‘‘condensing clothes dryer’’ proposed in 

the LG Petition for Waiver are 

essentially the same as the definitions 

discussed above from the international 

test standards. Therefore, DOE proposes 

to define ‘‘conventional clothes dryer’’ as 

‘‘a clothes dryer that exhausts the 

evaporated moisture from the cabinet,’’ 

and ‘‘vent-less clothes dryer’’ as ‘‘a 

clothes dryer that uses a closed-loop 

system with an internal condenser to 

remove the evaporated moisture from 

the heated air. The moist air is not 

discharged from the cabinet.’’ DOE is 

proposing to use the term ‘‘vent-less’’ to 

reflect the actual consumer utility (i.e. 

no external vent required) instead of 

‘‘condensing’’ because of the possibilty 

of market availability of vented dryers 

that also condense. DOE invites 

comment on these proposed definitions. 

After evaluating the installation 

conditions detailed in EN Standard 

61121 (section 6.1), AS/NZS Standard 

2442.1 (section 3.4), and Whirlpool’s 

proposed amendments to the DOE test 

procedure, DOE believes that the 

proposed amendments regarding the 

exhaust duct installation requirements 

in DOE’s publication of the LG Petition 

for Waiver are appropriate for testing 

vent-less dryers, along with additional 

clarifications. DOE notes that the 

exhaust duct installation conditions 

proposed in the LG Petition for Waiver 

simply remove the requirement of 

installing an exhaust simulator for a 

clothes dryer without an exhaust duct 

(vent-less dryer). The international test 

standards, detailed above, similarly 

require that a clothes dryer without an 

exhaust duct be tested as such, but also 

provide additional conditions for a 

clothes dryer with an optional exhaust 

duct, stating that such a dryer should be 

tested without the duct installed. DOE 

believes these installation conditions 

provide additional clarity and cover all 

possible clothes dryer configurations as 

well as provide harmonization with 

international test standards. Therefore, 

DOE proposes in today’s notice to 

amend section 2.1 of the DOE test 

procedure for clothes dryers, which 

covers installation conditions, to qualify 

the requirement for an exhaust 

simulator so that it would only apply to 

conventional clothes dryers, with 

additional clarification that vent-less 

clothes dryers be tested without the 

exhaust simulator installed and, if a 

dryer is designed to operate with an 

optional exhaust duct, the dryer shall be 

tested without the duct installed. 

DOE also believes that the provisions 

in EN Standard 61121 regarding a 

condensation box provides additional 

clarity in an effort to cover all possible 

vent-less dryer configurations. For this 

reason, DOE is proposing to revise 

section 2.1, ‘‘Installation,’’ of the DOE 

test procedure for clothes dryers to add 

the requirement in the installation 

conditions that ‘‘if a manufacturer gives 

the option to use a vent-less dryer with 

or without a condensation box, the 

dryer shall be tested with the 

condensation box installed.’’ In 

addition, DOE proposes to amend the 

testing cycle measurement in section 3.3 

of the DOE test procedure for clothes 

dryers to add that ‘‘if the dryer 

automatically stops during a cycle and 

the reason is that the condensation box 

is full of water, the test is stopped, and 

the test run is invalid.’’ This 

requirement would ensure consistency 

of the measured efficiency. 

Also regarding installation conditions, 

DOE believes that Whirlpool’s proposal 

to add a requirement that the condenser 

unit of the dryer must remain in place 

and not be taken out of the dryer for any 

reason between tests would provide 

additional clarification to the test 

procedure and ensure that all 

manufacturers are testing products 

under the same conditions. For this 

reason, DOE proposes in today’s SNOPR 

to add in section 2.1 of the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure regarding 

installation the provision that ‘‘the 

condenser unit of the dryer must remain 

in place and not be taken out of the 

dryer for any reason between tests.’’ 

DOE invites comment on the proposed 

amendments regarding installation 

conditions, including exhaust 

configuration, condensation box, and 

condenser unit requirements. 

DOE believes that the methodology in 

the current DOE test procedure for 

conventional (vented) dryers can be 

applied to vent-less dryers, with a 

number of added clarifications. Based 

upon starting test conditions detailed in 

EN Standard 61121 (section 9.1) and 

Whirlpool’s proposed amendments, 

DOE agrees that section 2.8 of 10 CFR 

430 subpart B appendix D will likely 

need to be revised to provide a 

consistent and repeatable approach for 

vent-less clothes dryers. Currently, this 

section, which addresses clothes dryer 

preconditioning, requires that before 

any test cycle is initiated, the clothes 

dryer must be operated without a test 

load in the non-heat mode for 15 

minutes or until the discharge air 

temperature varies less than 1 °F during 

a period of 10 minutes, whichever is 

longer. Because a vent-less clothes dryer 

does not have discharge air for which 

the temperature can be measured, DOE 

proposes to revise this section to require 

that, for vent-less clothes dryers, the 

steady-state temperature must be equal 

to ambient room temperature according 

to section 2.2 of appendix D before the 

start of all test runs, with a note that this 

can be done by leaving the machine at 

ambient room conditions for at least 12 

hours but not more than 36 hours 

between tests. DOE also proposes to 

revise section 2.8, ‘‘Test loads,’’ of the 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure to add 

a qualification to the procedure for preconditioning that it applies only to 

vented clothes dryers. 

DOE agrees with the provisions in 

section 9.2.2 of EN Standard 61121 and 

Whirlpool’s proposed amendments that 

specify that the first cycle after a period 

of non-operation longer than 36 hours 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37624 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

shall not be used for evaluation, and 

that, between test cycles, the door of the 

tumble dryer shall be closed except for 

loading (and unloading). DOE notes that 

this would make the first test run on an 

unused (dry) condensing dryer invalid 

and could not be used for the energy 

efficiency calculations. DOE believes 

these provisions will maintain a clear 

and repeatable testing procedure and 

produce accurate and representative 

results. Therefore, DOE proposes in 

today’s notice to incorporate these 

provisions into section 3.3 of the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure. DOE 

welcomes comment on these provisions 

as well as data comparing test results 

allowing longer or shorter than 36 hours 

of non-operation to evaluate the 

repeatability of test results. 

DOE notes that section 9.2.1 of EN 

Standard 61121 requires that at least 

five valid test cycles be performed and 

the results averaged. DOE’s clothes 

dryer test procedure does not specify 

multiple test cycles to obtain the 

representative EF, and DOE is not aware 

of data suggesting that test-to-test 

variation is sufficient to warrant a 

requirement for more than one test 

cycle. Therefore, DOE is not proposing 

amendments addressing the number of 

valid test cycles. DOE welcomes input 

and data on this issue. 

DOE also investigated the water 

consumption of vent-less clothes dryers. 

Based upon its review of products on 

the U.S. market, DOE is unaware of any 

vent-less electric compact (240V) 

condensing dryers which use water in a 

heat exchanger to condense moisture in 

the air exiting the drum; instead, 

available units use an air-to-air heat 

exchanger. DOE’s review also showed 

that only vent-less combination washer/ 

dryers use water to condense moisture 

in the air exiting the drum for products 

on the market in the United States. As 

part of its energy testing of clothes 

dryers conducted at an independent 

laboratory, DOE measured the water 

consumed by a vent-less combination 

washer/dryer according to the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure (without 

the use of the exhaust simulator). The 

test procedure was conducted three 

times, and the combination washer/ 

dryer consumed on average 3.25 gallons 

(27.1 lb) of cold water, with a range of 

2.83 gallons to 3.95 gallons. Although 

this water consumption is not 

insignificant, combination washer/ 

dryers represent a very small niche of 

the U.S. clothes dryer market and, 

therefore, DOE believes that the benefit 

of measuring water use for vent-less 

dryers is outweighed by the burden that 

would be placed on manufacturers to 

measure water consumption. For this 

reason, DOE is not proposing amend the 

DOE test procedure to include a 

requirement to measure the water 

consumption for vent-less condensing 

clothes dryers. DOE welcomes comment 

and data on the water consumption of 

vent-less clothes dryers and whether 

measurement of water consumption 

should be included in the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure. 

DOE believes the results from DOE’s 

tests at an independent laboratory are 

representative of the repeatability of 

results that would be observed using the 

testing procedures proposed in today’s 

SNOPR. Although DOE’s tests were 

conducted using the alternate test 

procedure in the LG Petition for Waiver, 

DOE believes that the additional 

clarifications proposed in today’s 

SNOPR would not significantly affect 

these testing results. Therefore, DOE 

believes that the amendments to the test 

procedure to for vent-less clothes dryers 

proposed in today’s notice would 

produce accurate and repeatable 

measurements of CEF. 

The proposed amendments for ventless clothes dryers would cover 

products which are not covered under 

the current DOE test procedure. For this 

reason, the proposed amendments in 

today’s SNOPR for vent-less clothes 

dryers would not affect the existing EF 

ratings of residential clothes dryers. 

Therefore, no change to the current 

clothes dryer energy conservation 

standards would be required. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(e)) 

4. Detergent Specifications for Clothes 

Dryer Test Procedure Preconditioning 

Section 2.6.3 of the current DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure specifies 

that the test cloth be preconditioned by 

performing a 10-minute wash cycle in a 

standard clothes washer using AHAM 

Standard Test Detergent IIA. 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix D, section 

2.6.3. This detergent is obsolete and no 

longer supplied by AHAM or other 

suppliers. The current AHAM standard 

detergent is identified as AHAM 

standard test detergent Formula 3. 

Because AHAM Standard detergent IIA 

is no longer available to manufacturers, 

DOE proposes to amend section 2.6.3 of 

the clothes dryer test procedure to 

specify the use of AHAM standard test 

detergent Formula 3 in test cloth 

preconditioning. 

Clothes washer tests that DOE 

conducted with AHAM standard test 

detergent Formula 3 suggest that the 

dosage that is specified in section 

2.6.3(2) of the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure for AHAM Standard 

detergent IIA—6.0 grams (g) per gallon 

of water—may no longer be appropriate, 

because at the end of clothes washer test 

cloth preconditioning, which specifies 

the same dosage, undissolved clumps of 

detergent were observed in the cloth 

load. Further, DOE conducted extractor 

tests that indicate that detergent dosage 

impacts RMC measurements by as much 

as several percent. 

AHAM’s clothes dryer test standard, 

AHAM HLD–1–2009, specifies a 

standard test detergent Formula 3 

dosage of 27 g + 4.0 g/lb of base test load 

for test cloth pre-treatment. For DOE’s 

clothes dryer test cloth preconditioning, 

the current test procedure specifies that 

clothes washer water fill level be set to 

the maximum level, regardless of test 

load size. In today’s notice, DOE is 

proposing to amend the test load size for 

standard-size clothes dryers to 8.45 lb 

±.085 lb (see section III.C.5.c.), which 

would result in a detergent dosage for 

AHAM standard test detergent Formula 

3 of 60.8 g. DOE believes that the 

detergent concentration should be set by 

the pounds of test cloth in this standardsize test load because this load is more 

closely matched to the maximum water 

fill level than is the compact-size test 

load (3.0 lb ±.03 lb.) For preconditioning 

a compact-size test load, DOE proposes 

that the same detergent dosage would be 

specified because the water fill level 

would remain the same as for the larger 

load, resulting in the same 

concentration of the water/detergent 

mixture. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 

appendix D, revised section 2.6.3. 

Due to the observed problems 

associated with the current dosage 

specification in the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure, DOE is tentatively 

proposing in today’s notice to amend 

section 2.6.3 of the clothes dryer test 

procedure to require 60.8 g of AHAM 

standard test detergent Formula 3 for 

test cloth preconditioning, but is also 

seeking further information on the 

appropriate detergent concentration. 

DOE is unaware of any data indicating 

that changes to the detergent 

specifications for test cloth 

preconditioning would affect the 

measured efficiency. DOE believes that 

the proposed amendments in today’s 

SNOPR changing the detergent 

specifications for test cloth 

preconditioning would not affect the EF 

rating of residential clothes dryers and 

would not require revision of the 

existing energy conservation standards 

for these products. However, DOE 

welcomes data showing the effects of 

changing the detergent specifications for 

test cloth preconditioning on the 

measured EF for clothes dryers. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37625 

32See 62 FR 45484 (Aug. 27, 1997); 68 FR 62198 

(Oct. 31, 2003). 

33For more information visit: http:// 

www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/rass/. 

5. Changes To Reflect Current Usage 

Patterns and Capabilities 

a. Clothes Dryer Number of Annual 

Cycles 

As noted above, DOE established its 

test procedure for residential clothes 

dryers in a final rule published in the 

Federal Register on May 19, 1981. 46 

FR 27324. Although DOE has updated 

its test procedure for residential clothes 

washers since that time,32 it has not 

updated its residential clothes dryer test 

procedure since it was first established 

in 1981. In the revised residential 

clothes washer test procedure, the 

average number of annual use cycles 

was revised to reflect current (at the 

time) consumer use patterns. DOE noted 

in the October 2007 Framework 

Document that the average number of 

dryer use cycles assumed in the revised 

clothes washer test procedure is 

inconsistent with the use cycles in the 

clothes dryer test procedure. 

(Framework Document, STD No. 1 at p. 

4) 

In the case of the average residential 

clothes washer annual use cycles, DOE 

published a final rule on August 27, 

1997, amending the DOE clothes washer 

test procedure to lower the annual 

clothes washer use cycles from 416 to 

392 cycles per year, a value that DOE 

determined to be more representative of 

current usage patterns. 62 FR 45484. 

Further, the revised DOE clothes washer 

test procedure assumes that 84 percent 

of all clothes washer loads are dried in 

clothes dryers. Thus, based upon the 

parameters in the current residential 

clothes washer test procedure, the 

annual usage pattern for clothes dryers 

is calculated to be 329 cycles per year. 

In contrast, the current DOE residential 

clothes dryer test procedure assumes an 

average annual clothes dryer use of 416 

cycles per year, which is 21 percent 

higher than the number of cycles per 

year derived from the current clothes 

washer test procedure. DOE notes that 

the number of annual cycles does not 

factor into the EF calculation except in 

the case of gas clothes dryers with 

standing pilots (which DOE determined 

are no longer available on the market), 

nor is the number of annual cycles used 

in the life-cycle cost (LCC), national 

energy savings (NES), or national impact 

analysis (NIA) calculations, which 

instead use consumer survey data. DOE 

sought comment on this issue in the 

October 2007 Framework Document. 

(Framework Document, STD No. 1 at p. 

5) 

In response to the October 2007 

Framework Document, AHAM stated 

that it supports changing the clothes 

dryer test procedure to decrease the use 

cycles from 416 to 329 cycles per year, 

as proposed by DOE, based on usage 

patterns for residential washers. 

(AHAM, STD No. 8 at p.1) CEE also 

supported decreasing the number of use 

cycles to be more consistent with the 

clothes washer test procedure. CEE 

noted that in the amendments to the 

DOE test procedure for clothes washers 

in 1997, the clothes dryer utilization 

factor (i.e., percentage of clothes washer 

loads dried in clothes dryers) was set to 

84 percent. However, CEE was unsure 

whether 392 (the number of annual 

clothes washer cycles) or 329 (84 

percent of 392) is the correct number of 

clothes dryer cycles, and recommended 

that DOE re-examine the clothes dryer 

utilization factor. (CEE, STD No. 10 at 

p. 1) EEI stated that the test procedure 

should have fewer use cycles based on 

the EIA’s RECS data and demographic 

projections. (EEI, STD No. 5 at p. 2) 

Whirlpool commented that 392 

annual clothes washer cycles are 

generally accepted as valid. However, 

Whirlpool stated that the value of 84 

percent of washer loads being machined 

dried is high. Whirlpool cited data from 

Procter & Gamble indicating that 

consumers average 5.72 loads per week, 

or 297 annually, and that line drying 

and blocking are a common alternative 

to machine drying. Whirlpool also 

stated that other surveys suggest that 

annual laundry loads are closer to 343 

than 392, which, if the 84 percent were 

applied, would result in 288 dryer loads 

annually. However, Whirlpool 

concluded that the annual number of 

cycles should be 298 (equaling 76 

percent of the 392 clothes washer 

loads). (Whirlpool, STD No. 7 at p. 2) 

The Joint Comment stated that DOE 

should request manufacturers to verify 

that the ratio of dryer cycles to washer 

cycles is 84 percent. The Joint Comment 

commented that DOE should establish 

the number of clothes dryer cycles 

independent of washer cycles because 

some laundry is washed but not dried 

in a dryer, while some clothes dryer 

loads have not been washed. The Joint 

Comment also noted that many recently 

manufactured clothes dryers have 

software that logs the number of cycles, 

and manufacturers could provide cycle 

count data for clothes dryers with at 

least 1 full year of operation (to account 

for month-to-month variations). The 

Joint Comment stated that another 

potential data source DOE should check 

is the California Measurement Advisory 

Council (CALMAC), which documents 

appliance energy use in California. 

(Joint Comment, STD No. 9 at pp. 10– 

11) 

For these reasons, DOE determined to 

review available data and investigate the 

number of annual clothes dryer use 

cycles in order to amend its test 

procedure to accurately reflect current 

consumer usage habits. DOE reviewed 

the 2004 California Statewide 

Residential Appliance Saturation Study 

(RASS), which surveyed appliance 

product usage patterns, including 

clothes dryers.33 The study surveyed 

7,686 households between 2002 and 

2003, asking the question ‘‘how many 

loads of clothes do you dry in your 

clothes dryer during a typical week?’’ 

For the 6,790 of these households that 

said they owned a clothes dryer, average 

usage was 4.69 loads per week, or 

approximately 244 loads per year. 

However, because this study provides 

only a limited dataset, DOE does not 

intend to rely only on this data to 

determine an appropriate number of 

annual use cycles for the clothes dryer 

test procedure. 

DOE also reviewed data from the 2005 

RECS to determine the annual usage of 

clothes dryers. RECS is a national 

sample survey of housing units that 

collects statistical information on the 

consumption of and expenditures for 

energy in housing units along with data 

on energy-related characteristics of the 

housing units and occupants. RECS 

provides enough information to 

establish the type (i.e., product class) of 

clothes dryer used in each household, 

the age of the product, and an estimate 

of the household’s annual energy 

consumption attributable to clothes 

dryers. DOE estimated the number of 

clothes dryer cycles per year for each 

sample home using data given by RECS 

on the number of laundry loads (clothes 

washer cycles) washed per week and the 

frequency of clothes dryer use. Based on 

its analysis of RECS data, DOE 

estimated the dryer usage factor (the 

percentage of washer loads dried in a 

clothes dryer) to be 91 percent and the 

calculated average usage to be 283 

cycles per year for all product classes of 

clothes dryers. DOE also notes that the 

RECS data shows a historical decreasing 

trend for the number of clothes washer 

and clothes dryer cycles. Because this 

dataset is more extensive than that of 

the RASS, DOE believes these numbers 

are more representative of annual usage 

patterns. Therefore, DOE is proposing to 

amend the number of annual use cycles 

in its test procedure to 283 cycles for all 

product classes of clothes dryers. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37626 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

The proposed amendments for the 

number of annual use cycles only affect 

the equations for the per-cycle gas 

energy consumption of a continuously 

burning pilot light in gas dryers, which 

factors into EF, and the estimated 

annual operating cost for all clothes 

dryers. DOE is not aware of any gas 

dryers currently available on the market 

that incorporate a continuously burning 

pilot light. For this reason, DOE believes 

the proposed amendments in today’s 

SNOPR to change the number of clothes 

dryer annual use cycles would not affect 

the EF rating of residential clothes 

dryers and would not require revision of 

the existing energy conservation 

standards for these products. 

b. Clothes Dryer Initial Remaining 

Moisture Content 

In the revised residential clothes 

washer test procedure, a new parameter, 

the RMC of the test cloth, was 

introduced. The RMC is the ratio of the 

weight of water contained by the test 

load at the completion of the clothes 

washer energy test cycle to the bone-dry 

weight of the test load, expressed as a 

percent. Correspondingly, the initial 

RMC of a clothes load being dried is a 

function of RMC at the end of a clothes 

washer cycle. The current DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure specifies an initial 

RMC of 70 ± 3.5 percent. As was 

explained above for the average number 

of use cycles per year, the RMC of 

typical clothes loads in the residential 

clothes washer test procedure should be 

consistent with values defined in the 

clothes dryer test procedure. However, 

DOE believes that the initial RMC in the 

clothes dryer test procedure may not 

reflect typical RMCs of actual clothes 

dryer loads. 

DOE notes that the revision to the 

clothes washer test procedure changed 

the clothes washer energy conservation 

standards metric to a modified energy 

factor (MEF), which established a 

method for crediting the performance of 

clothes washers that lower the RMC 

and, thereby, reduce clothes drying 

energy use. Since the clothes dryer test 

procedure was established in 1981 (46 

FR 27324, May 19, 1981), average 

clothes washer RMC has decreased due 

to the introduction of higher efficiency 

models with higher final spin speeds. 

Therefore, while clothes dryer energy 

use has decreased with the lower RMC, 

clothes washer energy use has increased 

somewhat to achieve the higher spin 

speeds. This energy use is accounted for 

in the residential clothes washer energy 

conservation standards rulemaking, and 

the net national annual energy use for 

clothes washers and clothes dryers 

combined is expected to decrease as 

average RMC is reduced. During the 

course of the standards rulemaking for 

clothes washers that culminated in a 

final rule published in the Federal 

Register on January 12, 2001, DOE 

estimated RMCs at specific efficiency 

levels. 66 FR 3314. For the residential 

clothes washer standard which became 

effective January 1, 2007 (1.26 MEF), 

DOE estimated a weighted-average RMC 

of 56 percent. 

As discussed in section I, the EF for 

clothes dryers is determined by 

measuring the total energy required to 

dry a standard test load of laundry to a 

‘‘bone dry’’ state. If today’s clothes dryer 

loads have initial RMCs that are lower 

than the nominal 70 percent specified in 

the existing DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure, revisions to the test 

procedure to reflect more realistic (i.e., 

lower) RMCs would result in the current 

EF rating increasing for a given clothes 

dryer, since the clothes dryer would 

have less water to remove. 

AHAM commented in response to the 

October 2007 Framework Document that 

an RMC of 56 percent is realistic, and 

added that it will collect additional 

information to validate this estimate. 

(AHAM, STD No. 8 at p. 1.) Whirlpool 

stated that the weighted-average RMC 

from clothes washers that it sells in 

North America is approximately 56 

percent and that a revised test 

procedure should use this value. 

(Whirlpool, STD No. 7 at pp. 1–2.) CEE, 

EEI, and ALS also support revising the 

clothes dryer test procedure to account 

for lower RMC. (CEE, STD No. 10 at p. 

1; EEI, STD No. 5 at p. 2; ALS, STD No. 

6 at p. 1) CEE added that the lower 

average RMC is likely due to recent 

improvements in clothes washers, 

particularly the entrance of horizontalaxis washers with high spin speeds and 

significantly reduced RMC. (CEE, STD 

No. 10 at p. 1.) 

The Joint Comment also commented 

that a lower RMC for the clothes dryer 

test procedure is justified. The Joint 

Comment referenced CEC data for the 

relationship between residential clothes 

washer MEF and RMC, which shows 

that models just meeting current energy 

conservation standards have an average 

RMC of 55 percent. The Joint Comment 

also noted that a regression fit through 

the entire CEC data set shows a 

residential clothes washer with an MEF 

of 0.817 (which approximates pre-2001 

standards) would have an estimated 

RMC of 72 percent, which is comparable 

to the value in the existing test 

procedure. (Joint Comment, STD No. 9 

at pp. 12–13.) 

DOE agrees that a review of the 

residential clothes washer models in the 

CEC database suggests that the average 

RMC is less than the nominal 70 percent 

which is currently provided in the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure. Therefore, 

DOE considered amendments to the 

clothes dryer test procedure to address 

RMC. 

As part of the preliminary analyses for 

the residential clothes dryers energy 

conservation standards rulemaking, 

DOE estimated the RMC of clothes 

washers using a distribution of values 

for models listed in the December 12, 

2008, CEC product database. For 

products for which the RMC was listed, 

the RMC values ranged from 30 percent 

to 61 percent, with an average of 46 

percent. 

As part of the October 2007 

Framework Document, DOE requested 

data from AHAM showing the 

shipments of residential clothes washers 

for which RMC was reported, along with 

shipment-weighted RMC (See Table 

0.7). These data sets, each including 

disaggregated data for front-loading and 

top-loading clothes washers, as well as 

reported overall values for all units, 

provide insight into what initial clothes 

dryer RMC would be most 

representative of current residential 

clothes washers. However, as noted 

above, AHAM indicated that the data 

contains only shipments for which the 

RMC was reported and thus the total 

will not be equal to actual shipments 

reported for 2000–2008. The data 

indicate that RMC has been decreasing 

consistently, from about 54 percent in 

2000 to 47 percent in 2008, and suggest 

that the initial RMC of nominally 70 

percent in the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure is greater than the current 

shipment-weighted residential clothes 

washer average RMC. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37627 

34AHAM, 2009. AHAM Weighted RMC for Front 

Load and Top Load Units, 2000–2008—DOE 

Clothes Dryer Rulemaking, Secondary Data Request. July 7, 2009. Docket No. EE–2007–BT– 

STD–0010, Comment Number 18 

TABLE 0.7—AHAM SHIPMENT-WEIGHTED CLOTHES WASHER RMC DATA SUBMITTAL 34

Year 

Clothes washer shipments for which RMC 

was reported 

Shipment-weighted RMC 

(%) 

Frontloading Top-loading Total Frontloading Top-loading Total 

2000 ................................................................................. 232,714 686,440 919,154 43.6 57.4 53.9 

2001 ................................................................................. 235,989 473,629 709,618 41.3 57.7 52.2 

2002 ................................................................................. 280,667 529,265 809,932 41.5 58.1 52.3 

2003 ................................................................................. 351,411 1,676,877 2,028,288 43.1 54.5 52.5

2004 ................................................................................. 1,179,813 5,270,285 6,450,098 42.2 52.8 50.9 

2005 ................................................................................. 1,563,108 5,394,511 6,957,619 40.8 52.7 50.1 

2006 ................................................................................. 1,851,218 5,628,279 7,479,497 39.3 51.4 48.4 

2007 ................................................................................. 1,973,825 5,371,142 7,344,967 38.3 51.4 47.8 

2008 ................................................................................. 2,043,024 4,492,059 6,535,083 38.1 51.0 47.0 

Based on the shipment-weighted RMC 

data submitted by AHAM and DOE’s 

own review of the CEC residential 

clothes washer database, DOE believes 

that an initial RMC of 47 percent is 

representative of current residential 

clothes dryer initial test load 

characteristics. Therefore, DOE is 

proposing in today’s notice to amend 

section 2.7, ‘‘Test loads,’’ of the clothes 

dryer test procedure to require that the 

initial RMC be changed from 70 ± 3.5 

percent to 47 percent. DOE is not 

proposing to allow the ± 3.5 percent 

range in RMC because the proposed 

amendments to the DOE clothes dryer 

test procedure for automatic cycle 

termination, detailed in section III.C.2, 

would require that the test load be 

initially prepared to between 42- and 

47-percent RMC, and that final 

adjustments be made to the RMC to 

achieve 47-percent ± 0.33-percent RMC, 

in order to account for over-drying 

energy consumption. 

Alternatively, if DOE, in the final rule, 

does not adopt the proposed 

amendments in today’s SNOPR for 

testing automatic cycle termination, 

presented in section III.C.2, but adopts 

only these aforementioned proposed 

amendments to change the initial RMC, 

DOE proposes to specify an initial RMC 

of 47 ± 3.5 percent. In that case, the 

tolerance of ± 3.5 percent on the 

nominal initial RMC, as currently 

specified in DOE’s test procedure, 

would allow the same flexibility in test 

cloth preparation as is currently 

allowed. If DOE, in the final rule, does 

adopt the proposed amendments to 

account for automatic cycle termination, 

then the tolerance of ± 3.5 percent for 

the initial RMC would not be necessary. 

DOE welcomes comment on and 

additional data regarding the 

representative initial RMC for current 

dryer test loads. 

DOE also notes that the current test 

procedure contains a provision in the 

calculation of per-cycle energy 

consumption that is intended to 

normalize EF by the reduction in RMC 

over the course of the drying cycle. A 

scaling factor of 66 is applied, which is 

representative of the percentage change 

from the nominal initial RMC of 70 

percent to the nominal ending RMC of 

4 percent. However, DOE notes that the 

proposed changes to account for 

automatic cycle termination, as 

presented above in section III.C.2, 

would require amending the 

calculations for the per-cycle energy 

consumption to remove the need for this 

scaling factor. Therefore, DOE is not 

proposing to amend the scaling factor in 

today’s SNOPR. Alternatively, if DOE, 

in the final rule, does not adopt the 

proposed amendments in today’s 

SNOPR for testing automatic cycle 

termination, presented in section III.C.2, 

but adopts only these aforementioned 

proposed amendments to change the 

initial RMC, DOE proposes to change 

the scaling factor to 43 to reflect a 

starting RMC of 47 percent. If DOE, in 

the final rule, does adopt the proposed 

amendments to account for automatic 

cycle termination, then changes to the 

scaling factor would not be necessary. 

As noted above in section I, 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. 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)) 

As part of the October 2007 

Framework Document, DOE requested 

data from AHAM to help evaluate the 

effect of a lower initial RMC on 

measured EF for clothes dryers which 

minimally comply with existing energy 

conservation standards. Table 0.8 lists 

and Figure 0.3 illustrates the data 

AHAM provided for the change in 

measured EF that was observed when 

initial RMC was reduced from 

nominally 70 percent to nominally 56 

percent. When the scaling factor in the 

calculation of per-cycle energy 

consumption, described above, was 

changed to 52—reflecting a change in 

RMC during the test cycle from an 

initial 56 percent to a final 4 percent— 

measured EF increased by an average of 

22 percent in AHAM’s test sample of 11 

baseline clothes dryers. Under these 

conditions, the average EF increased 

from 3.09 to 3.77 lb per kWh. When this 

scaling factor was left as 66 as currently 

provided for in the DOE test procedure, 

measured EF decreased by an average of 

4 percent when initial RMC was 

reduced as described. In this case, 

average EF decreased from 3.09 to 2.97 

lb per kWh. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37628 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 0.8—AHAM DATA SUBMITTAL FOR THE IMPACT OF INITIAL RMC ON CLOTHES DRYER ENERGY FACTOR

Initial RMC (%) Baseline Model EF 

(Using Existing Scaling 

Factor = 66) Test Target Actual 

1a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 70 3.1 

2a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 70.08 3.08 

3a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 70.08 2.99 

4a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 70.24 3.11 

5a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 70.33 3.08 

6a ............................................................................................................................................. 70 70.17 3.07 

7a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 69.7 3.07 

8a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 71.6 3.27 

9a ............................................................................................................................................. .................... 70.5 3.03 

10a ........................................................................................................................................... .................... 70.9 3.13 

11a ........................................................................................................................................... .................... 70 3.04 

Test Target Actual 

Baseline Model EF 

(Using Revised Scaling 

Factor = 52) 

Baseline Model EF 

(Using Existing Scaling 

Factor = 66) 

1b ................................................................................................. .................... 56 3 .77 2.97 

2b ................................................................................................. .................... 55 .99 3 .73 2.94 

3b ................................................................................................. .................... 55 .99 3 .85 3.03 

4b ................................................................................................. .................... 55 .99 3 .74 2.95 

5b ................................................................................................. .................... 58 .43 3 .73 2.94 

6b ................................................................................................. 56 58 .58 3 .8 2.99 

7b ................................................................................................. .................... 58 .58 3 .82 3.01 

8b ................................................................................................. .................... 55 .4 3 .8 2.99 

9b ................................................................................................. .................... 55 .8 3 .78 2.98 

10b ............................................................................................... .................... 55 .7 3 .83 3.02 

11b ............................................................................................... .................... 56 3 .59 2.83 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP29JN10.017</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37629 

In order to supplement the data 

provided by AHAM, DOE conducted 

similar tests subsequent to the October 

2007 Framework Document for one 

representative vented electric standard, 

vented electric compact (240 V), vented 

gas, and vent-less electric compact (240 

V) clothes dryer in its test sample. DOE 

tested each of these units according to 

the current DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure, but changing the initial RMC 

from 70 percent ± 3.5 percent to 56 

percent ± 1 percent and 39 percent ± 1 

percent in order to evaluate the effects 

of lowering the initial RMC. DOE did 

not test an initial RMC of 47 percent 

because, at the time of testing, the 

shipment-weighted RMC data indicating 

47 percent was representative of 

laundry loads after the residential 

clothes washer cycle was not yet 

available to DOE. Therefore, DOE 

selected a wider range of initial RMC 

values for testing, such that effects of 

changing the initial RMC to a value in 

between the tested values could be 

interpolated from the testing results. 

DOE selected models that minimally 

complied with energy conservation 

standards for clothes dryers, except for 

the one vent-less model (since vent-less 

clothes dryers are not currently subject 

to energy conservation standards.) DOE 

selected a vent-less unit with an EF it 

considered a baseline for evaluating 

efficiencies of vent-less products. 

Table 0.9 shows the measured EF for 

each of the clothes dryers DOE tested at 

70-percent, 56-percent, and 39-percent 

initial RMC, and the percentage change 

in EF for the reduced initial RMC 

compared to the 70-percent initial RMC 

required by the current DOE test 

procedure. DOE notes that the scaling 

factor in the calculations of per-cycle 

energy consumption was adjusted to 52 

and 35 (from 66) for the initial RMCs of 

56 percent and 39 percent, respectively, 

in order to represent the nominal 

change in percent from the initial RMC 

to the final RMC, as discussed above. 

The results from DOE testing indicate 

that, on average, measured EF increases 

by about 23 percent and 70 percent 

when the initial RMC is changed to 56 

percent and 39 percent, respectively. 

DOE notes that the results showing a 23- 

percent increase in EF for the 56-percent 

initial RMC tests are in close agreement 

with AHAM’s test results, which shows 

a 22-percent increase in measured EF. 

TABLE 0.9—DOE TEST RESULTS EVALUATING REDUCED INITIAL RMC 

Product Class 

70% RMC 56% RMC 39% RMC 

EF EF % Change EF % Change 

Vented Electric Standard ......................................................................... 3.09 3.86 25.0 5.39 74.6 

Vented Electric Compact (240 V) ............................................................ 3.06 3.69 20.6 5.02 63.8 

Vented Gas .............................................................................................. 2.81 3.43 21.9 4.79 70.5 

Vent-less Electric Compact (240 V) ........................................................ 2.37 2.99 26.1 4.09 72.5 

Average ............................................................................................ .................... .................... 23.4 .................... 70.3 

Plotting these test data reveals a nonlinear trend in EF as a function of initial 

RMC, as seen in Figure III.4. DOE 

explored using a polynomial trend to fit 

the datasets in order to develop an 

estimate for the percentage change in EF 

resulting from changing the initial RMC 

to 47 percent, as proposed in today’s 

SNOPR. Using the polynomial trends, 

an initial RMC of 47 percent would be 

predicted to increase measured EF by 

approximately 47 percent on average, as 

shown in Table 0.10. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37630 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 0.10—CALCULATED ENERGY FACTOR USING POLYNOMIAL TREND FITS OF THE DOE TEST DATA

Product class Calculated EF at 

47% initial RMC 

% Change from 

70% initial RMC 

Vented Electric Standard ......................................................................................................................... 4.63 49.8 

Vented Electric Compact (240 V) ............................................................................................................ 4.37 42.8 

Vented Gas .............................................................................................................................................. 4.04 43.5 

Vent-less Electric Compact (240 V) ........................................................................................................ 3.58 51.2 

Average ............................................................................................................................................ ................................ 46.9 

After this analysis was complete, DOE 

conducted testing of three identical 

maximum-available gas clothes dryers 

as part of its energy conservation 

standards rulemaking preliminary 

analyses for clothes dryers. These tests 

investigated the measured EF for this 

model according to the current DOE test 

procedure with an initial RMC of 70 

percent ± 3.5 percent. In order to 

supplement the test procedure analysis 

discussed above, DOE subsequently 

conducted further testing on one of 

these maximum-available gas clothes 

dryers to evaluate the effects on EF of 

changing the initial RMC. DOE tested 

the unit according to the current DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure at reduced 

initial RMCs of 56 percent ± 3.5 percent 

and 47 percent ± 3.5 percent. For each 

initial RMC, DOE conducted three tests 

for the test unit to determine if the 

results were repeatable. Table 0.11 

below shows the results from this 

testing, which indicate that, on average, 

measured EF increases by about 24 

percent and 41 percent when the initial 

RMC is reduced to 56 percent and 47 

percent, respectively. DOE notes that 

the results showing a 24-percent 

increase in EF for the 56-percent initial 

RMC tests are in close agreement with 

the AHAM data submittal and previous 

DOE test results. 

TABLE 0.11—DOE TEST RESULTS EVALUATING REDUCED INITIAL RMC USING MAXIMUM-AVAILABLE GAS CLOTHES

DRYER

Test run 

70% RMC 56% RMC 47% RMC 

EF EF % change EF % change 

1 ............................................................................................................... 2.81 3.51 24.3 3.87 37.1 

2 ............................................................................................................... 2.82 3.52 24.6 4.04 43.2 

3 ............................................................................................................... 2.83 3.50 23.9 4.00 41.7 

Average .................................................................................................... 2.82 3.51 24.3 3.97 40.6 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP29JN10.018</MATH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37631 

35Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, 

Trends in Energy Efficiency 2008. Available at: 

http://www.aham.org/ht/d/Store. 

Based on its testing, DOE believes that 

a 41-percent increase in EF resulting 

from switching from 70-percent to 47- 

percent initial RMC for a minimally 

compliant clothes dryer is 

representative. For this reason, DOE 

believes that the current energy 

conservation standards in terms of EF 

for vented clothes dryer product classes 

would need to be increased by 41 

percent, based upon the proposed 

amendments to change the initial RMC 

from 70 percent ± 3.5 percent to 47 

percent ± 3.5 percent. DOE would 

consider addressing this change in the 

concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for residential 

clothes dryers, for which a final rule is 

scheduled for publication by June 30, 

2011. 

c. Clothes Dryer Test Load Weight 

The current DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure requires a 7.00 lb ± .07 lb test 

load for standard-size dryers and a 3.00 

lb ± .03 lb test load for compact-size 

dryers. The Joint Comment stated in 

response to the October 2007 

Framework Document that DOE should 

determine whether the average test load 

weight for standard-capacity dryers is 

consistent with the current generation of 

washer capacities. The Joint Comment 

noted that, according to AHAM data, the 

average tub volume of washers has been 

increasing for a number of years. The 

Joint Comment indicated that between 

1981, when the dryer testing protocol 

was established, to 2004, the average 

washer tub volume increased by more 

than 20 percent (2.52 cubic feet (ft3) to 

3.05 ft3). The Joint Comment also 

pointed out that, in the current DOE 

clothes washer test procedure, the 

maximum test load weight of a 2.52 ft3

machine is 10.5 lb, while the maximum 

test load weight of a 3.05 ft3 machine is 

12.5 lb. The Joint Comment stated that 

if the ratio of the maximum test load 

weights were applied to the test load 

weight in the clothes dryer test 

procedure, this would imply that the 

current 7-lb test load weight should be 

adjusted upward by about 20 percent to 

8.3 lb. The Joint Comment added that 

DOE should request that manufacturers 

provide field data to document whether 

the current test load weight for 

standard-capacity dryers should be 

adjusted upward to account for the 

increased capacity of residential clothes 

washers. The Joint Comment also stated 

that DOE should interview detergent 

manufacturers since they are among the 

most knowledgeable parties in the 

laundry industry. Because the size of 

the load affects proper detergent dosing, 

the Joint Comment stated that detergent 

manufacturers are likely to have data on 

current load weights. (Joint Comment, 

STD No. 9 at pp. 11–12) 

DOE contacted detergent 

manufacturers to obtain data on average 

residential clothes washer load sizes. 

Procter and Gamble (P&G) conducted an 

internal study in 2003 on household 

laundry habits on a representative set of 

the population across the United States, 

from which P&G provided select 

summary data to DOE for this 

rulemaking. The clothes washer load 

weight data, which was based on a 

sample size of 3367 loads of laundry 

from a total of 510 respondents, showed 

that the average load size for top-loading 

and front-loading clothes washers was 

7.2 lb and 8.4 lb, respectively. (P&G, No. 

15 at p. 1) Based on the average 

shipment-weighted market share for 

top-loading and front-loading clothes 

washers between 2000 and 2008 from 

data submitted by AHAM (shown in 

Table 0.7), the shipment-weighted 

average clothes washer load size would 

be approximately 7.5 lbs. However, DOE 

recognizes that clothes washer 

capacities were likely to have increased 

since the survey was conducted in 2003, 

and therefore DOE continued its 

analysis to factor in these capacity 

changes to estimate a more current 

average load size. 

Table 0.12 shows the trends of the 

shipment-weighted average tub volume 

for residential clothes washers from 

1981 to 2008, based on data from the 

AHAM Trends in Energy Efficiency 

2008. The shipment-weighted average 

tub volume has increased from 2.52 ft3

in 1981 to 3.22 ft3 in 2008. 

TABLE 0.12—RESIDENTIAL CLOTHES

WASHER SHIPMENT-WEIGHTED AVERAGE TUB VOLUME TRENDS 35

Year 

Shipment-weighted 

average tub volume 

(ft3) 

% change 

since 1990 

1981 ...... 2.52 

1990 ...... 2.63 

1991 ...... 2.72 3.4 

1992 ...... 2.71 3.0 

1993 ...... 2.71 3.0 

1994 ...... 2.69 2.3 

1995 ...... 2.72 3.4 

1996 ...... 2.80 6.5 

1997 ...... 2.83 7.6 

1998 ...... 2.85 8.4 

1999 ...... 2.89 9.9 

2000 ...... 2.92 11.0 

2001 ...... 2.96 12.5 

2002 ...... 2.96 12.5 

2003 ...... 3.01 14.4 

2004 ...... 3.05 16.0 

2005 ...... 3.08 17.2 

2006 ...... 3.13 19.2 

2007 ...... 3.16 20.3 

2008 ...... 3.22 22.4 

Section 2.7, ‘‘Test Load Sizes,’’ in the 

DOE clothes washer test procedure 

provides the minimum, maximum, and 

average test load size requirements for 

the clothes washer test, which is 

determined based on the clothes 

container capacity. Table 0.13 shows the 

minimum, maximum, and average test 

load sizes for 2.52 ft3 and 3.22 ft3

container capacities, determined 

according to Table 5.1 in the DOE 

clothes washer test procedure. 

TABLE 0.13—DOE CLOTHES WASHER TEST LOAD SIZE REQUIREMENTS

[Table 5.1 of 10 CFR 430 Subpart B, Appendix J1] 

Container volume (ft3) Minimum load 

(lb) 

Maximum load 

(lb) Average load (lb) 

≥2.50 to <2.60 .................................................................................................................. 3.00 10.50 6.75 

≥3.20 to <3.30 .................................................................................................................. 3.00 13.30 8.15 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37632 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

36 J. Y. Kao. 1999. Energy Test Results of a 

Conventional Clothes Dryer and a Condensing 

Clothes Dryer. International Appliance Technical Conference, 49th. Proceedings. May 4–6, Columbus, 

OH, pp. 11–21, 1998. 

DOE notes that the average load size 

in the clothes washer test procedure 

increases by about 21 percent with the 

associated increase in capacity, which 

DOE believes proportionally impacts 

clothes dryer load sizes. Applying this 

ratio of average clothes washer test load 

sizes to the clothes dryer test load size 

would result in an increase from 7.00 lb 

to 8.45 lb for standard-size dryers. For 

these reasons, DOE is proposing to 

amend the clothes dryer test load size to 

8.45 lb for standard-size dryers. 10 CFR 

part 430, subpart B, appendix D, revised 

section 2.7.2. DOE is proposing to 

amend the test load size based on the 

change in average load size for clothes 

washers rather than the maximum load 

size because data from RECS 2005 

indicates that not all clothes that are 

washed are machine dried. Therefore, 

DOE believes that average clothes 

washer load size would be more 

representative of clothes dryer load size. 

DOE is also proposing to maintain the 

1-percent tolerance in load sizes 

specified by the current DOE test 

procedure for both standard-size dryers 

(8.45 lb ± .085 lb). 

DOE believes most compact clothes 

dryers are used in conjunction with 

compact-size clothes washers, and DOE 

does not have any information to 

suggest that the tub volume of such 

clothes washers has changed 

significantly. Therefore, DOE is not 

proposing to change the 3-lb test load 

size currently specified in the test 

procedure for compact clothes dryers. 

DOE welcomes data on the historical 

trends of compact-size clothes washer 

average tub volumes or any other data 

that would suggest a change in the 

clothes dryer test load size for compact 

clothes dryers. 

As noted previously, EF for clothes 

dryers is the bone-dry test load weight 

divided by the clothes dryer energy 

consumption per cycle. DOE notes that 

the proposed amendments to the test 

load size would increase both the bonedry test load weight and the energy 

consumption per cycle. For example, for 

a test in which the nominal RMC of the 

test load is reduced from an initial 70 

percent to a final 4 percent, an 8.45-lb 

test load would require about 5.6 lb of 

water to be removed during the drying 

cycle, whereas a 7-lb test load would 

require only 4.6 lb of water to be 

removed. DOE also notes that, as lower 

nominal RMCs are reached at the end of 

the test cycle, the rate and efficiency of 

water removal from the load would be 

higher for the larger test load simply 

because there would be more water in 

the load, hence making it easier to 

remove. 

In order to determine a quantifiable 

estimate of the change in the measured 

EF, DOE reviewed research and 

investigations of the effects of changing 

the load size on the measured 

efficiency. The National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (NIST) 

conducted testing to investigate the 

effects of changing the clothes dryer 

load size on the measured efficiency for 

a vented electric standard clothes dryer 

with a capacity of 6.3 ft3.36 NIST tested 

the clothes dryer according to the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure, except the 

test load size was varied from 2 lb to 15 

lb. Table 0.14 presents the results of the 

NIST testing, which shows an increase 

in EF when increasing the load size 

within the range of interest (i.e., from 7 

lb to 9 lb). 

TABLE 0.14—NIST VENTED ELECTRIC STANDARD CLOTHES DRYER VARIABLE TEST LOAD DATA

Test number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

Room Temperature, °F .................... 74 .1 74 .4 73 .8 73 .3 73 .8 74 .1 74 .4 74 .4 

Room Humidity, % ........................... 40 38 38 33 42 38 40 36 

Nominal Bone-Dry Weight, lb .......... 2 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 

Measured Bone-Dry Test Load 

Weight, lb ..................................... 1 .99 2 .99 4 .99 7 .00 8 .99 10 .98 13 .01 15 .01 

Measured Dry Test Load Weight, lb 2 .05 3 .06 5 .17 7 .99 9 .11 11 .56 13 .57 15 .71 

Measured Wet Test Load Weight, lb 3 .40 5 .10 8 .50 11 .89 15 .34 18 .98 22 .04 25 .56 

Measured Energy Consumption, 

kWh .............................................. 0 .953 1 .159 1 .593 2 .112 2 .667 3 .250 3 .796 4 .384 

Initial RMC, % .................................. 70 .30 70 .67 70 .52 69 .99 70 .67 72 .81 69 .35 70 .34 

Final RMC, % ................................... 2 .84 2 .48 3 .73 2 .88 1 .28 5 .27 4 .29 4 .67 

Per-Cycle Energy Consumption, 

kWh .............................................. 0 .970 1 .167 1 .637 2 .160 2 .638 3 .303 4 .005 4 .582 

EF, lb/kWh ....................................... 2 .06 2 .56 3 .04 3 .24 3 .41 3 .33 3 .25 3 .27 

Percentage Change in EF Compared to 7-lb Test, % ................... -36 .6 -20 .9 -6 .0 0 .0 5 .2 2 .7 0 .3 1 .1 

DOE estimated the percentage change 

in EF for an 8.45-lb test load by linearly 

interpolating the results for the 7-lb and 

9-lb tests. Using this method, the EF 

would increase by about 3.8 percent 

when increasing the test load size from 

7 lb to 8.45 lb. DOE believes that this 

percentage change in EF can be applied 

to all vented standard-size clothes dryer 

product classes because it believes the 

moisture removal mechanisms are 

comparable among them. For these 

reasons, DOE believes that the current 

energy conservation standards in terms 

of EF for vented standard-size clothes 

dryer product classes would need to be 

increased by 3.8 percent, based upon 

the proposed amendments to increase 

the test load size to 8.45 ± .085 lb for 

standard-size dryers. DOE would 

consider addressing this change in the 

concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for residential 

clothes dryers, for which a final rule is 

scheduled for publication by June 30, 

2011. DOE welcomes comment and data 

on current clothes dryer test load sizes 

and additional data showing the effects 

of changing the clothes dryer test load 

size on the measured EF for both 

standard-size and compact-size clothes 

dryers. 

d. Room Air Conditioner Annual 

Operating Hours 

The DOE test procedure currently 

assumes room air conditioners have an 

average annual use of 750 hours. DOE’s 

technical support document from 

September 1997, issued in support of 

the most recent room air conditioner 

energy conservation standards 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37633 

37U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support 

Document for Energy Conservation Standards for 

Room Air Conditioners. September 1997. Chapter 1, 

section 1.5. http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/residential/room_ac.html. 

38National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 

National Solar Radiation Database 1991–2005 

Update: User’s Manual, 2007. Available online at: 

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/41364.pdf. 

39Energy Information Administration, 2006 State 

Energy Consumption, Price, and Expenditure 

Estimates (SEDS), 2006. Washington, DC. Available 

online at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/ 

_seds.html. 

rulemaking, shows that the average 

annual operational hours are closer to 

500 hours,37 which would yield 

approximately 33-percent lower annual 

energy consumption than the annual 

energy consumption determined using 

the 750 operational hours assumed in 

the current test procedure. 

AHAM commented in response to the 

October 2007 Framework Document that 

the room air conditioner test procedure 

should be changed to account for fewer 

annual operating hours. (AHAM, STD 

No. 8 at p. 2.) The Joint Comment stated 

that DOE should update the room air 

conditioner test procedure for annual 

operating hours to reflect the best 

available information and to seek 

justification other than manufacturer 

assertions. The Joint Comment 

suggested checking the New York State 

Energy Research and Development 

Authority (NYSERDA) or the New York 

Department of Public Service, which 

have considerable ratepayer investments 

in changing out room air conditioners 

for more efficient models, and analysis 

to support this program may include 

data on hours of operation. (Joint 

Comment, STD No. 9 at p. 8) CEE also 

believes that DOE should research the 

number of annual hours of usage and 

does not believe that the hours have 

declined from 750 to 500. CEE believes 

the number of annual hours is higher, 

citing a study by the Northwest Power 

& Planning Council’s Regional 

Technical Forum, which is claimed to 

represent a low usage area, which found 

the average annual operating hours to be 

628. (CEE, STD No. 10 at p. 2.) 

DOE recognizes the uncertainty 

regarding room air conditioner usage 

patterns, and determined to investigate 

the annual hours of usage from a range 

of information sources to develop as 

accurate an estimate of annual operating 

hours as possible. DOE’s investigation 

revealed a lack of metered and survey 

data for the operating hours of 

individual room air conditioners. DOE 

found that estimates of the annual 

operating hours of use were often based 

on regional climatic data rather than 

actual room air conditioner use. DOE 

did find two sources of survey data on 

room air conditioner use in the EIA’s 

2005 RECS (and previous versions) and 

the CEC California Statewide RASS. The 

CEC survey contained only aggregated 

residential data, which limited any 

analysis pertaining to the annual 

operating hours. Its regional scope also 

limited the relevance of the data. EIA’s 

2005 RECS provides extensive data on 

individual residences, while providing a 

more expansive and representative 

sample of households. Thus, DOE 

continued its analysis using EIA’s 2005 

RECS. 

DOE reviewed data from the EIA’s 

2005 RECS to determine the annual 

usage of room air conditioners. As noted 

above, RECS is a national sample survey 

of housing units that collects statistical 

information on the consumption of and 

expenditures for energy in housing units 

along with data on energy-related 

characteristics of the housing units and 

occupants. RECS provides enough 

information to establish the type (i.e., 

product class) of room air conditioner 

used in each household, the age of the 

product, and also provides an estimate 

of the household’s annual energy 

consumption attributable to the room air 

conditioner. As a result, DOE was able 

to develop a household sample for the 

annual hours of use of a room air 

conditioner, which was used to 

calculate a weighted national average of 

room air conditioner usage hours. The 

data in the 2005 RECS indicates that the 

estimated room air conditioner average 

annual usage is 810 hours. This number 

of hours is higher than the current 750 

hours of the test procedure, and 

significantly higher than the 

approximately 500 hours suggested by 

the previous energy conservation 

standard rulemaking analysis. 

An investigation of the 2005 cooling 

season covered by RECS indicates that 

there were roughly 12-percent more 

cooling degree days (CDD) in 2005 than 

the 30-year 1971 to 2000 average. CDD 

is a sum of the difference between 

ambient temperature in °F and 65 °F for 

every hour of the year that the ambient 

temperature is higher than 65 °F for a 

given location, divided by 24 to convert 

from hours to days; DOE used data on 

CDD from the National Solar Radiation 

Database (NSRDB).38 The Annual 

Energy Outlook projections of CDD for 

the future suggest that the higher level 

of CDD will continue.39 Hence, the year 

2005 can be considered representative 

of future climate, and the predictions of 

annual hours based on the 2005 RECS 

is relevant within a certain level of 

uncertainty. However, DOE does not 

consider the increase of 60 hours from 

750 hours to 810 hours to be significant, 

because it does not exceed the 

uncertainty level associated with the 

RECS-based approach for estimation of 

this value. Hence, DOE is not proposing 

a change at this time in the annual 

operating hours used in the test 

procedure. 

e. Room Air Conditioner Part-Load 

Performance 

DOE noted in the October 2007 

Framework Document that the current 

DOE room air conditioner test 

procedure measures full-load 

performance, and is not able to assess 

energy savings associated with 

technologies which improve part-load 

performance. AHAM commented that 

the room air conditioner test procedure 

should not include part-load 

performance or seasonal energy 

efficiency ratio (SEER) ratings, stating 

that these are not realistic or applicable 

to room air conditioners. According to 

AHAM, room air conditioners are a 

commodity item with a compressor that 

operates only in on/off mode, and that 

consumers historically have not been 

willing to pay for part-load performance 

options. (AHAM, STD No. 8 at p. 2; 

AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, STD 

No. 4.6 at p. 24.) CEE commented that 

peak-load performance is of greater 

significance for room air conditioners 

than part-load performance. CEE 

recommended a two-part reporting 

requirement based on both EER and 

SEER. CEE stated that including partload operation in the test procedure 

would have more relevance for milder 

climates. (CEE, STD No. 10 at p. 2.) 

NRDC commented that if just one 

energy-use metric is used, it should be 

EER, since peak-load performance is 

most important for room air 

conditioners, and because it is difficult 

to develop a SEER test procedure that 

accurately reflects real-world 

performance. However, NRDC 

recommended the use of two energy-use 

metrics—one for peak-load performance 

and one for part-load performance. 

(NRDC, Public Meeting Transcript, STD 

No. 4.6 at pp. 25–26.) ACEEE 

commented that a SEER rating is not 

appropriate for room air conditioners 

due to their impact on utility peak 

demand. (ACEEE, Public Meeting 

Transcript, STD No. 4.6 at p. 25.) 

Finally, the Joint Comment stated that 

there is no compelling reason to change 

from an EER rating, and that if a SEER 

rating is considered, it should be used 

in addition to EER. (Joint Comment, 

STD No. 9 at p. 8.) 

DOE has concluded that widespread 

use of part-load technology in room air 

conditioners would probably not be 

stimulated by the development of a partVerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 Jun 28, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\29JNP2.SGM 29JNP2

sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37634 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

40ASHRAE Standard 58, ‘‘Method of Testing for 

Rating Room Air Conditioner and Packaged 

Terminal Air Conditioner Heating Capacity’’ 

load metric, and, hence, the significant 

effort of development of an accurate 

part-load metric is not likely to be 

warranted by the expected minimal 

energy savings. A part-load metric 

would measure efficiency of a product 

when operating at conditions other than 

maximum capacity and/or with outdoor 

or indoor conditions cooler than 

currently used in the DOE active mode 

energy test. In-field use of room air 

conditioners with currently available 

technologies, when enough cooling is 

provided to the space, any number of 

events can occur to prevent overcooling: the user may turn off the unit 

or adjust fan speed; or the controls 

might turn off the compressor, turn off 

both the compressor and the fan, or 

reduce fan speed. Delivery of cooling 

might be done more efficiently with 

part-load technologies, such as a 

compressor that can adjust its capacity 

rather than cycling on and off. However, 

sufficient information is not available 

regarding use of room air conditioner 

features to assess whether such 

alternative technologies would be cost 

effective. While a part-load metric 

would be a different measurement, it 

still measures the efficiency of the 

product’s delivery of cooling. The key 

design changes that improve full-load 

efficiency also improve part-load 

efficiency, so the existing EER metric is 

already a strong indication of product 

efficiency over a wide range of 

conditions. DOE concludes that the 

argument to develop an additional test 

for part load, or to change the room air 

conditioner metric to a part-load test, is 

not supported by available information. 

Also, because any part-load 

performance metric would address the 

same major function (cooling) as EER, 

DOE cannot consider a two-part 

performance metric including a partload performance metric (42 U.S.C 6295 

(o)(5)). Therefore, DOE does not plan to 

consider amendments to its room air 

conditioner test procedure to measure 

part-load performance. 

f. Room Air Conditioner Ambient Test 

Conditions 

DOE also considered whether the 

ambient test conditions in its test 

procedure for room air conditioners are 

representative of typical installations. 

The Joint Comment recommended 

increasing the ambient temperature of 

the DOE energy test procedure from 

95 °F to 115 °F, stating that room air 

conditioners are generally operated 

when the outdoor temperatures are the 

highest, and that they are often located 

on the south or west side of residences 

where the sun can shine on them during 

operation. (Joint Comment, STD No. 9 at 

p. 9.) DOE did not receive further 

information to support the specification 

of the higher temperature, and, 

therefore, is not considering an 

amendment to the ambient test 

conditions specified in the room air 

conditioner test procedure at this time. 

DOE welcomes comment and data 

indicating representative ambient test 

conditions for room air conditioners, 

and how changes to the ambient test 

conditions would affect the measured 

efficiency, in particular on units that 

minimally comply with current energy 

conservation standards. 

6. Room Air Conditioner Referenced 

Test Procedures 

The room air conditioner test 

procedure cites two test standards that 

are each at least 25 years old: (1) ANS 

Z234.1–1972 and (2) ASHRAE Standard 

16–69. Both the ANS (since renamed 

ANSI) and ASHRAE standards have 

been updated since DOE last revised its 

room air conditioner test procedure. The 

current standards are ANSI/AHAM 

RAC–1–R2008 and ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009), 

respectively. Because it is likely that 

any manufacturer rating it products is 

using the most recent test standards, 

DOE suggested in the October 2007 

Framework Document to consider 

updating its test procedure to 

incorporate by reference the most recent 

test standards. DOE sought comment on 

such a test procedure revision. 

AHAM and EEI both commented in 

response to the October 2007 

Framework Document that the room air 

conditioner test procedure should be 

amended to reference the most recent 

ANSI and ASHRAE test standards. 

(AHAM, STD No. 8 at p. 2; EEI, STD No. 

5 at p. 2.) 

Based on these comments on the 

October 2007 Framework Document, 

DOE reviewed the differences between 

the test standards currently referenced 

by the DOE test procedure and the latest 

versions of these standards in order to 

determine if amendments to reference 

the latest ANSI and ASHRAE test 

standards are appropriate. DOE notes 

that the sections that would be 

referenced in ANSI/AHAM RAC–1– 

R2008 by the DOE test procedure do not 

introduce any new changes in the 

measurement of cooling capacity or 

power input. DOE also notes that the 

sections that would be referenced in 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 

2009) by the DOE test procedure would 

introduce changes to the determination 

of capacity, four new temperature 

measurements, and changes to the test 

tolerances. DOE further notes that the 

referenced section numbers from the old 

and current test standards are identical. 

The following discussion details the 

differences between the test standards. 

ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 includes 

references to ‘‘the latest editions of 

ASHRAE Standard 16’’ and ‘‘ASHRAE 

Standard 58’’40 while ANS Z234.1–1972 

cites ASHRAE Standard 16–1969. ANSI/ 

AHAM RAC–1–R2008 also revised the 

wording of the ‘‘Nameplate’’ and 

‘‘Voltages for Standard Measurement 

Test’’ requirements in section 5 of ANS 

Z234.1–1972, and included differences 

in rounding converted Celsius 

temperatures in the tolerances listed in 

section 4 of ANS Z234.1–1972. 

However, these changes do not 

measurably alter the measured 

efficiency from the value that would be 

obtained using the existing DOE test 

procedure. ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 

also specifies different heating capacity 

test conditions as compared to ANS 

Z234.1–1972. It increases the outdoor 

side temperature from 45 °F to 47 °F, 

and specifies a maximum wet-bulb 

temperature of 60 °F for the indoor side, 

whereas ANS Z234.1–1972 has no such 

requirement for the maximum wet-bulb 

temperature. DOE notes that the changes 

to the heating capacity test conditions 

do not affect the measurement and 

calculation of cooling capacity and EER. 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 

(RA 2009) requires reporting of four 

additional temperatures that are not 

explicitly specified in ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1969: 

1. ‘‘Wet-bulb temperature of air leaving 

room side of air conditioner;’’ 

2. ‘‘Dry-bulb [* * *] temperature of air 

surrounding inner compartments of balanced 

ambient calorimeter;’’ 

3. ‘‘Wet-bulb temperature of air 

surrounding inner compartments of balanced 

ambient calorimeter;’’ and 

4. ‘‘Dry-bulb temperature of air surrounding 

calibrated room type calorimeter’’ 

The first additional temperature 

allows for flexibility in determining the 

condensate temperature measurement. 

The first additional temperature can be 

assumed the temperature of the 

condensate, since it is difficult to 

measure the temperature of the 

condensed moisture being transferred 

within the room air conditioner. This 

temperature is then used to calculate the 

‘‘enthalpy of condensed moisture 

leaving the room-side compartment,’’ 

which is an input for the calculation of 

the cooling capacity. While ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1969 mentions that the 

‘‘wet-bulb temperature of the air leaving 

the air conditioner’’ may be used as the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37635 

temperature of the condensate, under 

the calculation of ‘‘net total roomcooling effect,’’ it does not include this 

temperature in Table 2, ‘‘Data to be 

recorded for cooling-capacity tests.’’ 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 

2009) adds this temperature to Table 2. 

The remaining temperatures measure 

the conditions outside of either the 

calibrated room-side calorimeter set-up 

or the balanced ambient calorimeter setup, and assist in calculating the heat 

leakages in the capacity calculation. The 

‘‘dry-bulb and wet-bulb air temperatures 

surrounding [the] balanced ambient 

calorimeter’’ are mentioned in Table 1 of 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 

2009) as part of the rating conditions for 

the capacity test, but are not explicitly 

mentioned in Table 2. ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) adds these 

temperature measurements and the 

‘‘dry-bulb temperature of air 

surrounding calibrated room type 

calorimeter,’’ which is the equivalent 

temperature measurement for the 

calibrated room-type calorimeter 

introduced in section 4 of ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) 

to Table 2. 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 

(RA 2009) also adds requirements for 

periodic calibration of instruments and 

chambers to verify the accuracy of the 

instruments and the performance of the 

indoor room-side compartment. Section 

6.1.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16– 

1983 (RA 2009) states that ‘‘the 

performance of the indoor room-side 

compartment’’ should be verified 

according to industry standards ‘‘at least 

every six months.’’ Section 5.7 of ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) 

also adds the requirement to verify the 

accuracy of all instruments ‘‘at least 

annually’’ according to recognized 

standards. These requirements will add 

some burden to manufacturers but the 

low yearly occurrence will limit the 

overall burden, while ensuring the 

accuracy and repeatability of the test 

results. 

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 

(RA 2009) also adjusts the tolerances on 

the wet-bulb and dry-bulb temperatures 

measurements used to support 

calculation of airflow, to 1 °F from 0.5 

°F. These temperature measurements are 

used to determine the density of the air 

for calculating the room-side 

calorimeter airflow. The change in 

required tolerance for wet-bulb and drybulb air temperatures may have a slight 

impact due the possible introduction of 

additional error of about 0.1 percent on 

the airflow measurements, but other 

measurement tolerances have a greater 

impact on the value of the airflow 

measurements. In particular, the 

differential pressure measurement 

tolerance of 0.005 inches of water listed 

in section 5.3.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) can 

introduce a larger uncertainty to the 

airflow measurement, making the 

change in temperature tolerance 

negligible in comparison. Thus, the 

effect on the measured airflow due to 

the change in tolerances will be 

negligible. 

Section 4.2.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) ‘‘provides 

a method for determining cooling 

capacity on the room side only,’’ subject 

to restrictions, whereas ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1969 determines cooling 

capacity using both room-side and 

outdoor-side calorimetry. Section 4.2.1 

of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 

(RA 2009) also states, ‘‘the outdoor-side 

capacity, if measured, provides a 

confirming test of the cooling and 

dehumidifying effect.’’ The room-side 

capacity measurement is made 

independently of the outdoor-side 

measurement, and, due to the additional 

calibration of the compartments detailed 

in Section 6.1.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009), provides 

an accurate and verifiable 

representation of the cooling capacity 

without the outdoor-side capacity 

determination. 

Section 6.1.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) also 

introduces a correction factor based on 

the test room condition’s deviation from 

the standard barometric pressure of 

29.92 inches (in.) of mercury (Hg) (101 

kilopascal (kPa)). Section 6.1.3 of ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009) 

states that the cooling capacity may be 

increased 0.8 percent for each in. Hg 

below 29.92 in. Hg (0.24 percent for 

each kPa below 101 kPa). This change 

would not impact the measured 

efficiency of units tested at standard 

testing conditions. The capacity 

correction factor provides 

manufacturers with more flexibility in 

the test room conditions while 

normalizing results to standard 

conditions. 

DOE further believes that additional 

changes in the methodology of the test 

procedure introduced by ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009), 

such as the ability to use one calibrated 

calorimeter instead of two, will not 

measurably affect the measured EER and 

will provide greater flexibility in the 

measurement of room air conditioner 

parameters. Additional calibration of 

the instruments will have no effect on 

the measured efficiency, but will 

instead ensure accuracy and 

repeatability of testing results over time. 

The change in required tolerance for 

wet-bulb and dry-bulb air temperatures 

may have a slight impact on measured 

EER due the possible introduction of 

additional error of 0.1 percent on the 

airflow measurements, but other 

measurement tolerances already have a 

greater impact on the accuracy of the 

value of the airflow measurements. 

Therefore, DOE believes this effect will 

be negligible. DOE concludes that the 

updated test procedure would not have 

a measurable impact on the measured 

efficiency of current room air 

conditioners and units that complied 

with the energy conservation standards 

for room air conditioners according to 

the current test procedure are expected 

to be able to comply when tested 

according to the proposed test 

procedure. 

In sum, DOE has reviewed the most 

recent revisions of the referenced test 

standards, ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 

and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 

(RA 2009), and has determined that 

incorporation by reference of these 

versions provide more accurate and 

repeatable measurements of capacity 

while providing greater flexibility to 

manufacturers in selecting equipment 

and facilities, and does not add any 

significant testing burden. Furthermore, 

these revisions would not impact the 

measurement of EER for this equipment. 

DOE also believes that manufacturers 

may already be using these updated 

standards in their testing. Therefore, 

DOE is proposing in today’s SNOPR to 

amend the DOE test procedure to 

reference the relevant sections of ANSI/ 

AHAM RAC–1–R2008 and ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009). 

If DOE determines that the proposed 

amendments to reference the updated 

room air conditioner test standards 

ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 and ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009), 

discussed above, are not appropriate for 

the DOE room air conditioner test 

procedure, DOE would propose to 

correct the text regarding the referenced 

room air conditioner test standards, as 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR. The room air conditioner test 

procedure currently references ASHRAE 

Standard 16–69, ‘‘Method of Testing for 

Rating Room Air Conditioners.’’ The text 

in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix 

F, section 1, however, incorrectly 

identifies ASHRAE as ‘‘American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air 

Conditioning in Engineers.’’ The actual 

name of the referenced organization is 

‘‘American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers.’’ DOE proposed to correct 

this reference in 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix F, section 1 (which 

is being redesignated as section 2 in the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37636 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

proposed amendments) in the December 

2008 TP NOPR. 73 FR 74639, 74650. 

DOE did not receive any comments 

opposing this correction. Therefore, 

DOE would continue to propose the 

above text corrections regarding the 

referenced room air conditioner test 

standard if it decides not to amend the 

DOE room air conditioner test 

procedure to reference ANSI/AHAM 

RAC–1–R2008 and ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009). 

7. Clothes Dryer Referenced Test 

Procedure 

The DOE clothes dryer test procedure 

currently references the industry test 

standard AHAM Standard HLD–1–1974, 

‘‘AHAM Performance Evaluation 

Procedure for Household Tumble Type 

Clothes Dryers’’ (AHAM Standard HLD– 

1–1974.) Specifically, the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure requires that the 

clothes dryer under test be restricted by 

adding the AHAM exhaust simulator 

described in section 3.3.5 of AHAM 

Standard HLD–1–1974. The AHAM test 

standard has been updated since DOE 

established its clothes dryer test 

procedure. The current standard is 

designated as AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009. Because it is likely that any 

manufacturer rating it products is using 

the most recent test standard, DOE 

considered potential amendments to its 

clothes dryer test procedure to reference 

AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009. DOE 

notes that section 3.3.5.1 of AHAM 

Standard HLD–1–2009 regarding 

exhausting conditions provides the 

same requirements for the exhaust 

simulator as required by AHAM 

Standard HLD–1–1974. For this reason, 

DOE is proposing in today’s SNOPR to 

amend the DOE test procedure to 

reference AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009. Because the requirements for the 

exhaust simulator would be the same, 

DOE believes that the proposed 

amendments would not affect the EF 

rating of residential clothes dryers and 

would not require revisions of the 

existing energy conservation standards 

for these products. 

DOE also recognizes that the newly 

issued AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009 

allows for the optional use of a modified 

exhaust simulator, which is included as 

a more convenient option than the 

exhaust simulator originally specified 

for testing vented clothes dryers. The 

requirements for the modified exhaust 

simulator are presented in section 

3.3.5.2 of AHAM Standard HLD–1– 

2009. The test standard notes that only 

limited testing has been done to 

compare results using the two exhaust 

simulators, and that users are invited to 

submit results and comments for both 

options. Because this modified exhaust 

simulator is new and limited data exists 

to compare the effects of using different 

exhaust simulators, DOE will continue 

to require the standard exhaust 

simulator currently referenced by the 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure. 

However, DOE welcomes data from 

manufacturers comparing the effects of 

the two exhaust simulators on the 

drying efficiency using the DOE test 

procedure. DOE also welcomes 

comment on whether the test procedure 

should be amended to allow for the 

optional modified exhaust simulator. 

Section 1.8 in the ‘‘Definitions’’ 

section of the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure also references an obsolete 

AHAM clothes dryer test standard, 

AHAM Standard HLD–2EC, ‘‘Test 

Method for Measuring Energy 

Consumption of Household Tumble 

Type Clothes Dryers,’’ December 1975. 

No provisions of this test standard are 

currently used in DOE’s test procedure, 

and, therefore, DOE proposes to remove 

this reference. DOE welcomes comment 

on this proposal. 

8. Technical Correction for the PerCycle Gas Dryer Continuously Burning 

Pilot Light Gas Energy Consumption 

The equation provided under section 

4.4 (‘‘Per-cycle gas dryer continuously 

burning pilot light gas energy 

consumption’’) of the current DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure contains a 

technical error in the equation for 

calculation of the per-cycle gas dryer 

continuously burning pilot light gas 

energy consumption, Eup, in Btu’s per 

cycle. Eup is the product of the following 

three factors: (A) The cubic feet of gas 

consumed by the gas pilot in hour; (B) 

the total number of hours per year the 

pilot is consuming gas while the dryer 

is not operating in active mode (8,760 

total hours per year minus 140 hours 

per year the dryer operates in active 

mode) divided by the representative 

average number of clothes dryer cycles 

in a year (416); and (C) the corrected gas 

heat value. Part (B) of this equation is 

currently incorrect, reading (8760—140/ 

416) and missing the appropriate 

parentheses. The equation should 

correctly subtract the total number of 

hours per year the pilot is consuming 

gas while the dryer is not operating in 

active mode from the number of hours 

per year the dryer operates in active 

mode, before dividing by the average 

number of dryer cycles in a year. The 

equation should read ((8760—140)/416) 

to correctly calculate the per-cycle gas 

dryer continuously burning pilot light 

gas energy consumption. Therefore, 

DOE proposes in today’s SNOPR to 

amend the equation, as discussed above, 

to correctly calculate the per-cycle gas 

dryer continuously burning pilot light 

gas energy consumption. 

9. Clarification of Gas Supply Test 

Conditions for Gas Clothes Dryers 

Section 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2 of the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure specifies 

maintaining ‘‘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 for natural gas or 11 to 13 

inches of water column for propane gas. 

DOE believes that the references to 

‘‘normal inlet test pressure’’ in sections 

2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2 of its clothes dryer 

test procedure, which are provided to 

specify natural gas and propane supply 

pressure test conditions, respectively, 

may be confusing as to what is meant by 

the term ‘‘normal.’’ DOE believes that 

such language is not necessary because 

the gas supply pressure immediately 

ahead of all controls is explicitly stated 

as either 7 to 10 inches water column 

for natural gas or 11 to 13 inches of 

water column for propane gas. 

Therefore, DOE proposes to revise the 

test pressure conditions in sections 

2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2 of the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure to specify 

maintaining ‘‘the gas supply to the 

clothes dryer immediately ahead of all 

controls at a pressure of’’ 7 to 10 inches 

of water column for natural gas and 11 

to 13 inches of water column for 

propane gas. 

DOE also believes that the 

specifications for a gas pressure 

regulator in sections 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2 

of its clothes dryer test procedure 

should clarify that the outlet pressure 

for a dryer equipped with a pressure 

regulator for which the manufacturer 

specifies an outlet pressure, should be 

approximately that recommended by the 

manufacturer. DOE is proposing to make 

these minor revisions to the language in 

these sections to clarify the outlet 

pressure conditions for a dryer 

equipped with a gas pressure regulator. 

D. Compliance With Other EPCA 

Requirements 

1. Test Burden 

Section 323(b)(3) of EPCA requires 

that ‘‘[a]ny test procedures prescribed or 

amended under this section shall be 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results which measure energy 

efficiency, energy use * * * or 

estimated annual operating cost of a 

covered product during a representative 

average use cycle or period of use * * * 

and shall not be unduly burdensome to 

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

tentatively concluded in the December 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37637 

2008 TP NOPR that amending the 

relevant DOE test procedures to 

incorporate clauses regarding test 

conditions and methods found in IEC 

Standard 62301 for measuring standby 

mode and off mode power consumption, 

along with the proposed clarifications 

and text corrections, would satisfy this 

requirement. 73 FR 74639, 74650 (Dec. 

9, 2008) 

For clothes dryers, AHAM supported 

the development of an empirical factor, 

with appropriate energy units, that 

might be added to the active energy-use 

measurements to account for the delay 

start and cycle finished features, thereby 

eliminating the need for separate 

measurements in these modes. AHAM 

added that, while assumptions would 

still be involved in development of this 

type of factor, it would ease the testing 

requirements and burden. (AHAM, TP 

No. 10 at p. 5) Whirlpool believes that 

this proposed regulation would not be 

burdensome, subject to the changes it 

suggested for the active, standby, and off 

mode definitions (as discussed in 

section III.B.2) and changes to the test 

procedure (as discussed in sections 

III.B.3 and III.B.4). (Whirlpool, TP No. 9 

at p. 4) For the reasons discussed in 

section III.B.2, DOE is not proposing 

amendments to measure delay start and 

cycle finished modes in the clothes 

dryer test procedure in today’s SNOPR, 

and is instead proposing simplified 

methodology in which the energy use 

associated with delay start and cycle 

finished modes, although determined to 

not be energy use in a standby mode, 

would be approximated by the energy in 

inactive and off modes. Therefore, DOE 

tentatively concludes that the proposed 

amendments to the clothes dryer test 

procedures for measuring standby and 

off modes adopted in today’s SNOPR are 

not unduly burdensome. 

AHAM commented that DOE’s 

proposed ambient temperature of 74 °F 

for determining standby power for room 

air conditioners would substantially 

increase the test burden, both in terms 

of time and resources, resulting in 

higher testing costs. AHAM stated that 

laboratories would require another 

facility to run the standby test 

procedure due to the different ambient 

conditions. AHAM believes that standby 

power should be measured at the same 

temperature conditions used for 

determining active energy use of room 

air conditioners. (AHAM, TP No. 10 at 

p. 5) GE also commented that the 

smaller tolerances for ambient 

conditions, which are different from the 

conditions for cooling performance 

testing, represent a testing burden. (GE, 

Public Meeting Transcript, TP No. 8 at 

pp. 99–100) For the reasons noted in 

section III.B.3, DOE is proposing to 

provide manufacturers flexibility in 

setting the ambient conditions for 

standby mode and off mode testing. The 

proposed amendments to the room air 

conditioner test procedure in today’s 

SNOPR specify maintaining the indoor 

test conditions at the temperature 

required by section 4.2 of IEC Standard 

62301. Further, if the unit is tested in 

the cooling performance test chamber, 

the proposed amendments allow the 

manufacturer to maintain the outdoor 

test conditions either as specified for the 

DOE cooling test procedure or according 

to section 4.2 of IEC Standard 62301. 

DOE notes that the indoor temperature 

range for the cooling performance test 

falls within the temperature range 

allowed by IEC Standard 62301 and, 

along with the flexibility to the outdoor 

test conditions, would not require 

another facility to run the standby and 

off mode tests. In addition, DOE is not 

proposing amendments to the room air 

conditioner test procedure that would 

measure energy use in delay start or offcycle modes as discussed in section 

III.B.2. For these reasons, DOE 

tentatively concludes that the test 

conditions proposed in today’s SNOPR 

are not unduly burdensome, yet still 

produce representative standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption 

measurements. 

The proposed amendments to the 

DOE test procedure for clothes dryers to 

test automatic termination control 

dryers are based upon an international 

testing standard used to determine 

compliance with energy conservation 

standards for clothes dryers in 

Australia. A number of manufacturers 

that sell dryers in the United States also 

sell clothes dryers in Australia, and, 

therefore, likely already test clothes 

dryers according to this test standard. 

DOE believes that the proposed 

amendments would not require testing 

methods and equipment that are 

substantially different from the test 

methods and equipment in the current 

DOE test procedures and, therefore, 

would not require manufacturers to 

make a major investment in test 

facilities and new equipment. 

The proposed amendments to the 

DOE test procedure for residential 

clothes dryers to test vent-less clothes 

dryers are based on an international test 

standard used throughout the EU to 

determine compliance with energy 

conservation standards. A number of 

manufacturers that sell dryers in the 

United States also sell dryers in the EU, 

and, therefore, likely already test clothes 

dryers according to this test standard, 

which is very similar to the amended 

test procedure proposed in today’s 

SNOPR. DOE believes that the proposed 

amendments would not require testing 

methods and equipment that are 

substantially different from the test 

methods and equipment in the current 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure. 

DOE’s proposed amendments to the 

clothes dryer test procedure, to reflect 

current usage patterns and capabilities, 

do not substantially change the testing 

procedures and methods such that they 

would become burdensome to conduct. 

DOE’s proposed amendments to change 

the number of annual use cycles affects 

only the calculations of the per-cycle 

continuously burning pilot light gas 

energy consumption and the estimated 

annual operating cost for gas clothes 

dryers with such pilots. The number of 

annual use cycles does not impact the 

testing procedures themselves. The 

proposed amendments to change the 

initial RMC from 70 percent to 47 

percent are intended to reflect current 

clothes loads after a wash cycle. DOE 

believes that such a change would likely 

only require a moderately longer spin 

time during test load preparation to 

achieve the proper lower moisture 

content, and that it would not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. Finally, the 

proposed amendment to change the test 

load size for standard-size clothes 

dryers from 7.00 lb ± .07 lb to 8.45 lb 

± .085 lb, respectively, would not 

impact the testing procedures 

themselves, and would not require 

manufacturers to make any significant 

new investment in test facilities and 

equipment. DOE believes that these 

proposed amendments to the DOE 

clothes dryer test procedure would 

produce test results that measure energy 

use of clothes dryers during a 

representative average use cycle. 

The proposed amendments to update 

the references to external standards in 

the DOE room air conditioner test 

procedure are based on the availability 

of revised standards representing 

current industry practices and methods. 

The proposed amendments to reference 

ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 do not 

introduce any new changes in the 

measurement of cooling capacity or 

power input, while the proposed 

amendments to reference ANSI/ 

ASHRAE Standard 16–69 would 

introduce four new temperature 

measurements, provide increased test 

tolerances, and allow additional 

flexibility in the methodology for 

measuring capacity. These proposed 

amendments would not require 

manufacturers to make any significant 

new investment in test facilities and 

equipment, nor require significant 

changes in the testing methodology. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37638 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

41The DOE test procedure amendments reference 

ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 sections 4, 5, 6.1, and 

6.5, and state that these provisions should be conducted in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE 

Standard 16–1983 (RA 2009). 

For the reasons noted above, DOE has 

tentatively concluded that the 

amendments to the active mode test 

procedures would produce 

representative test results for both 

residential clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners, and that testing under the 

test procedures would not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. Therefore, as 

discussed in section III.C.6, DOE is 

proposing in today’s SNOPR to amend 

the DOE test procedure to reference the 

relevant sections of ANSI/AHAM RAC– 

1–R2008 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 

16–1983 (RA 2009).41

2. Potential Incorporation of IEC 

Standard 62087 

Section 325(gg)(2)(A) of the EISA 

2007 amendments to EPCA directs DOE 

to consider IEC Standard 62087 when 

amending test procedures to include 

standby mode and off mode power 

measurements. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(2)(A)) As discussed in section 

III.B.1 of this notice, DOE reviewed IEC 

Standard 62087 ‘‘Methods of 

measurement for the power 

consumption of audio, video, and 

related equipment’’ (Second Edition 

2008–09) and determined that it would 

not be applicable to measuring power 

consumption of electrical appliances 

such as clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners. Therefore, DOE has 

determined that referencing IEC 

Standard 62087 is not necessary for the 

proposed amendments to the test 

procedures that are the subject of this 

rulemaking. 

3. Integration of Standby Mode and Off 

Mode Energy Consumption Into the 

Efficiency Metrics 

Section 325(gg)(2)(A) requires that 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption be ‘‘integrated into the 

overall energy efficiency, energy 

consumption, or other energy descriptor 

for each covered product’’ unless the 

current test procedures already fully 

account for the standby mode and off 

mode energy consumption or if such an 

integrated test procedure is technically 

infeasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) For 

clothes dryers, today’s SNOPR does not 

affect DOE’s proposal in the December 

2008 TP NOPR to incorporate the 

standby and off mode energy 

consumption into a ‘‘per-cycle combined 

total energy consumption expressed in 

kilowatt-hours’’ and into an CEF, as 

discussed in section III.B.5 of this 

notice. For room air conditioners, 

today’s SNOPR does not affect DOE’s 

proposal in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR to incorporate the standby and off 

mode energy consumption into a metric 

for ‘‘combined annual energy 

consumption’’ and into an CEER, as 

discussed in section III.B.5. 

IV. Effects of Test Procedure Revisions 

on Compliance With Standards 

As noted in section I, DOE must 

determine to what extent, if any, the 

proposed test procedures would alter 

the measured energy efficiency of 

covered products as determined under 

the existing test procedures. If DOE 

determines that an amended test 

procedure would alter the measured 

efficiency of a covered product, DOE 

must amend the applicable energy 

conservation standard during the 

rulemaking carried out with respect to 

such test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)) 

As noted above in section II, EPCA 

provides that amendments to the test 

procedures to include standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption will 

not determine compliance with 

previously established standards. 

(U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(C)) Because the 

proposed amended test procedures for 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption would not alter existing 

measures of energy consumption or 

efficiency, these proposed amendments 

would not affect a manufacturer’s ability 

to demonstrate compliance with 

previously established standards. 

Based on DOE’s review of the 

proposed amendments to the DOE 

clothes dryer active mode test procedure 

in today’s SNOPR, DOE believes that 

only the revisions to the initial RMC, 

described in section III.C.5.b, and the 

changes to the standard-size dryer test 

load sizes, described in section III.C.5.c, 

would affect the measured EF as 

compared to the existing test procedure. 

Based upon DOE testing and analysis of 

minimally compliant clothes dryers and 

review of available research, DOE 

believes that the proposed amendments 

to the initial RMC would increase the 

measured EF of minimally compliant 

clothes dryers by 41 percent, while the 

proposed amendments to the test load 

size for standard-size clothes dryers 

would increase the measured EF by 3.8 

percent. Because of the proposed 

amendments in today’s SNOPR, the 

measured EF of minimally compliant 

clothes dryers would increase by about 

41 percent for compact-size clothes 

dryers and about 46 percent for 

standard-size clothes dryers. Table 0.1 

shows how the current energy 

conservation standards would be 

affected by the proposed amendments to 

the DOE clothes dryer test procedure. 

DOE will consider such changes in the 

concurrent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for clothes dryers 

and room air conditioners. 

TABLE 0.1—ENERGY FACTOR OF A MINIMALLY COMPLIANT CLOTHES DRYER WITH THE CURRENT AND PROPOSED

AMENDED TEST PROCEDURE

Product class 

Energy factor (lb/kWh) 

Current test 

procedure 

Proposed amended test procedure 

1. Electric, Standard (4.4 ft3 or greater capacity) ....................................................................................... 3.01 4.39 

2. Electric, Compact (120 v) (less than 4.4 ft3 capacity) ............................................................................ 3.13 4.41 

3. Electric, Compact (240 v) (less than 4.4 ft3 capacity) ............................................................................ 2.90 4.09 

4. Gas .......................................................................................................................................................... 2.67 3.90 

Because the proposed clothes dryer 

test procedure amendments for active 

mode would substantially change the 

existing EF metric, DOE has tentatively 

decided to create a new appendix D1 in 

10 CFR 430 subpart B for informational 

purposes only. Such an appendix would 

contain a clothes dryer test procedure 

that manufacturers would be required to 

use on the mandatory compliance date 

of amended clothes dryer energy 

conservation standards. The final rule 

for the clothes dryer energy 

conservation standards rulemaking is 

due to be delivered to the Federal 

Register on June 30, 2011, and will have 

a compliance date 3 years later. 

Manufacturers must continue to use 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37639 

42For more information visit: http:// 

www.sba.gov/. 

43A searchable database of certified small 

businesses is available online at: http:// 

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

appendix D to subpart B of part 430 for 

clothes dryers until the energy 

conservation standards at 10 CFR 

430.32(h) are amended to require 

mandatory compliance using appendix 

D1. 

Because DOE’s review of the proposed 

room air conditioner test procedure 

amendments tentatively concluded that 

the measured EER would not be 

affected, manufacturers must continue 

to use appendix F to measure room air 

conditioner active mode energy use. 

Manufacturers would not be required to 

use the proposed provisions for standby 

mode and off mode energy use 

(specifically, sections 2.2, 3.2, 4.2, and 

5.3) until the mandatory compliance 

date of amended room air conditioner 

energy conservation standards. 

All representations related to standby 

mode and off mode energy consumption 

of both clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners made 180 days after the 

date of publication of the test 

procedures final rule in the Federal 

Register and before the compliance date 

of amended energy conservation 

standards must be based upon the 

standby mode and off mode 

requirements of the amended test 

procedures (for clothes dryers, appendix 

D1 and for room air conditioners, 

amended appendix F.) 

V. Procedural Requirements 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

Today’s proposed regulatory action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under section 3(f) of Executive Order 

12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

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

this proposed 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 an initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis for any rule that by law must 

be proposed for public comment, unless 

the agency certifies that the proposed 

rule, if promulgated, will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. As 

required by Executive Order 13272, 

‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities 

in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003, to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE’s 

procedures and policies may be viewed 

on the Office of the General Counsel’s 

Web site (http://www.gc.doe.gov). 

DOE reviewed today’s SNOPR under 

the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act and the procedures and 

policies published on February 19, 

2003. This SNOPR prescribes 

amendments to test procedures that 

would be used to test compliance with 

energy conservation standards for the 

products that are the subject of this 

rulemaking; these amendments are 

described in detail elsewhere in the 

preamble. DOE tentatively certifies that 

this SNOPR would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The factual 

basis for this certification is as follows. 

The Small Business Administration 

(SBA) considers an entity to be a small 

business if, together with its affiliates, it 

employs less than a threshold number of 

workers specified in 13 CFR part 121. 

The thresholds set forth in these 

regulations are based on size standards 

and codes established by the North 

American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS).42 The threshold 

number for NAICS classification for 

335224, which applies to household 

laundry equipment manufacturers and 

includes clothes dryer manufacturers, is 

1,000 employees. Additionally, the 

threshold number for NAICS 

classification for 335224, which applies 

to air conditioning and warm air heating 

equipment and commercial and 

industrial refrigeration equipment, is 

750 employees. 

Most of the manufacturers supplying 

clothes dryers and room air conditioners 

are large multinational corporations. As 

part of the energy conservation 

standards rulemaking for residential 

clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners, DOE requested comment 

on whether there are any manufacturer 

subgroups, including potential small 

businesses, that it should consider for 

its analyses. However, DOE did not 

receive any comments regarding 

whether there are any residential 

clothes dryer or room air conditioner 

manufacturers that would be considered 

small businesses. Searches of the SBA 

Web site 43 to identify manufacturers 

within NAICS code 335224 that produce 

clothes dryers revealed only one 

potential small business that could be 

affected by these proposed test 

procedure amendments. DOE also 

investigated manufacturers registered as 

small businesses under NAICS codes 

333415 for room air conditioners, and 

only one small business was identified 

that could be affected by these proposed 

test procedure amendments, out of 

approximately 10 manufacturers 

supplying room air conditioners in the 

United States. 

The amendments set forth in today’s 

SNOPR for standby and off mode energy 

use to adopt definitions of modes based 

on the relevant provisions from IEC 

Standard 62301 CDV do not impose 

additional impacts beyond those 

discussed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR to amend DOE’s test procedures 

by incorporating testing provisions to 

address standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption. DOE tentatively 

concluded in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR that the proposed measures 

would not have a significant impact on 

either small or large manufacturers 

under the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act for the reasons set forth 

below. 

The tests to measure standby and off 

mode can be conducted in the same 

facilities used for the current energy 

testing of these products, so there would 

be no additional facilities costs required 

by the proposed rule. The power meter 

required for these tests might require 

greater accuracy than the power meter 

used for current energy testing, but the 

investment required for a possible 

instrumentation upgrade would likely 

be relatively modest—on the order of 

two thousand dollars per power meter— 

for small manufacturers with lower 

market share that may require as few as 

one power meter because they have 

fewer units to test. This cost is small 

compared to the overall financial 

investment needed to undertake the 

business enterprise of testing consumer 

products which involves facilities, 

qualified staff, and specialized 

equipment. 

The duration of the standby and off 

mode testing is not expected to exceed 

the time required to conduct current 

energy testing. The proposed standby 

and off mode test could begin 

immediately following the active mode 

efficiency test and therefore, would not 

require additional set up, 

instrumentation, or waiting period. The 

testing official could run simultaneous 

tests on other units and simply record 

the results of the test at the end of the 

standby period. For these reasons, DOE 

believes that these requirements for 

equipment and time to conduct the 

additional tests would not be expected 

to impose a significant economic impact 

on affected small businesses. 

Accordingly, DOE stated that it did 

not believe that the proposed rule 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37640 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

would have a significant economic 

impact on entities subject to the 

applicable testing requirements. 73 FR 

74639, 74651–52 (Dec. 9, 2008). DOE 

received no comments on this issue. 

Because DOE believes that the proposed 

amendments to address standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption in 

today’s SNOPR would not impose 

additional impacts beyond those that 

would be imposed by the amendments 

proposed in the December 2008 TP 

NOPR, DOE believes that the 

amendments in today’s SNOPR 

regarding standby mode and off mode 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on the small entities subject to 

the applicable testing requirements. 

The proposed rule in today’s SNOPR 

would also amend DOE’s active mode 

test procedures for clothes dryers and 

room air conditioners by: (1) Providing 

a clothes dryer testing procedure to 

properly account for automatic cycle 

termination; (2) providing a clothes 

dryer testing procedure for vent-less 

clothes dryers; (3) revising the clothes 

dryer and room air conditioner test 

procedures to reflect current usage 

patterns and capabilities; and (4) 

incorporating references to current 

external test standards for room air 

conditioners and clothes dryers. These 

proposed amendments to the test 

procedures can be conducted in the 

same facilities used for the current 

energy testing of these products, and 

because all manufacturers of vent-less 

clothes dryers which DOE identified 

also produce vented clothes dryers, no 

new investments would be required for 

the proposed addition of vent-less 

clothes dryers as covered products. In 

addition, the test time and equipment 

required for the proposed testing of 

automatic cycle termination are 

comparable to those for the existing 

clothes dryer test procedure. Further, 

the proposed adjustments to load size 

and initial RMC would require 

relatively minor changes in test 

materials and extraction time, 

respectively, and other proposed 

amendments to reflect current usage 

patterns and capabilities are reflected in 

changes to the calculations, which do 

not have a time impact. The proposed 

amendments to reference the current 

external clothes dryer test standard 

would reference the same procedures 

and equipment as the test standard 

referenced by the existing DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure. Finally, DOE 

recognizes that the proposed 

amendments to reference the current 

external room air conditioner test 

standards would add requirements for 

additional calibration of test 

instruments (at least once every six 

months). DOE estimates that such 

calibration would cost on the order of 

1,000 to 1,500 dollars per year. Thus, 

such requirements for equipment and 

time to conduct the additional tests 

would not be expected to impose a 

significant economic impact. 

Accordingly, DOE does not believe that 

the proposed rule would have a 

significant economic impact on entities 

subject to the applicable testing 

requirements. 

For these reasons, DOE tentatively 

concludes and certifies that today’s 

SNOPR 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 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 

This rule contains a collection-ofinformation requirement subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) which 

has been approved by OMB under 

control number 1910–1400. Public 

reporting burden for compliance 

reporting for energy conservation 

standards is estimated to average 30 

hours per response, including the time 

for reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. Send comments 

regarding this burden estimate, or any 

other aspect of this data collection, 

including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, to DOE (see ADDRESSES) and by 

e-mail to 

Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this notice, DOE is proposing test 

procedure amendments that it expects 

would be used to develop and 

implement future energy conservation 

standards for clothes dryers and room 

air conditioners. 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 rule amends an 

existing rule without changing its 

environmental effect, and, therefore, is 

covered by the Categorical Exclusion in 

10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, paragraph 

A5, which applies because this rule 

would establish revisions to existing test 

procedures that would not affect the 

amount, quality, or distribution of 

energy usage, and, therefore, would not 

result in any environmental impacts. 

Accordingly, neither an environmental 

assessment nor an environmental 

impact statement is required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

imposes certain requirements on 

agencies formulating and implementing 

policies or regulations that preempt 

State law or that have Federalism 

implications. 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 

1999). 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 

that it will follow in developing such 

regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE 

examined this proposed rule and 

determined that it would not preempt 

State law and 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)) Therefore, Executive Order 

13132 requires no further action. 

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 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37641 

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 specifies the following: (1) 

The preemptive effect, if any; (2) any 

effect on existing Federal law or 

regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct while promoting 

simplification and burden reduction; (4) 

the retroactive effect, if any; (5) 

definitions of key terms; and (6) 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 

whether 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, this 

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) (Pub. L. 

104–4; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires 

each Federal agency to assess the effects 

of Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments and the 

private sector. 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 estimates of the resulting 

costs, benefits, and other effects on the 

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

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 such 

governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE 

published a statement of policy on its 

process for intergovernmental 

consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 

12820. (The policy is also available at 

http://www.gc.doe.gov). Today’s 

proposed rule contains neither an 

intergovernmental mandate nor a 

mandate that may result in an 

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. 

Today’s proposed 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 proposed 

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 notice under OMB and DOE 

guidelines and has concluded that it is 

consistent with applicable policies in 

those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to OIRA a Statement 

of Energy Effects for any proposed 

significant energy action. A ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ is defined as any action 

by an agency that promulgates or is 

expected to lead to promulgation of a 

final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866, or any successor order; and (2) 

is likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy; or (3) is designated by the 

Administrator of OIRA as a significant 

energy action. For any proposed 

significant energy action, the agency 

must give a detailed statement of any 

adverse effects on energy supply, 

distribution, or use if the proposal is 

implemented, and of reasonable 

alternatives to the action and their 

expected benefits on energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Today’s proposed 

regulatory action is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. It has likewise not been 

designated as a significant energy action 

by the Administrator of OIRA. 

Moreover, it would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. 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; 42 

U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), DOE must comply 

with section 32 of the Federal Energy 

Administration Act of 1974, as amended 

by the Federal Energy Administration 

Authorization Act of 1977 (FEAA). (15 

U.S.C. 788) Section 32 essentially 

provides in part that, where a proposed 

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 modifications to the 

test procedures addressed by this 

proposed action incorporate testing 

methods contained in the commercial 

standard, IEC Standard 62301. 

Specifically DOE is proposing to 

incorporate from section 4, (‘‘General 

conditions for measurements’’), 

paragraph 4.2, ‘‘Test room,’’ paragraph 

4.3, ‘‘Power supply.’’ paragraph 4.4, 

‘‘Supply voltage waveform,’’ and 

paragraph 4.5, ‘‘Power measurement 

accuracy,’’ and from section 5 

(‘‘Measurements’’), paragraph 5.1, 

‘‘General’’ and paragraph 5.3, 

‘‘Procedure’’ of IEC Standard 62301. 

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 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37642 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

the Chairman of the FTC about the 

impact on competition of using the 

methods contained in this standard, 

before prescribing a final rule. 

VI. Public Participation 

A. Attendance at the Public Meeting 

The time, date, and location of the 

public meeting are listed in the DATES

and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning 

of this SNOPR. To attend the public 

meeting, please notify Ms. Brenda 

Edwards at (202) 586–2945. As 

explained in the ADDRESSES section, 

foreign nationals visiting DOE 

Headquarters are subject to advance 

security screening procedures. 

B. Procedure for Submitting Requests to 

Speak 

Any person who has an interest in 

today’s notice, or who is a 

representative of a group or class of 

persons that has an interest in these 

issues, may request an opportunity to 

make an oral presentation at the public 

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

shown in the ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this notice between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. Requests may 

also be sent by mail or e-mail to: Ms. 

Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Building Technologies Program, 

Mailstop EE–2J, 1000 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121, or Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

Persons who wish to speak should 

include in their request a computer 

diskette or CD in WordPerfect, Microsoft 

Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format 

that briefly describes the nature of their 

interest in this rulemaking and the 

topics they wish to discuss. Such 

persons should also provide a daytime 

telephone number where they can be 

reached. 

DOE requests persons scheduled to 

make an oral presentation to submit an 

advance copy of their statements at least 

one week before the public meeting. 

DOE may permit persons who cannot 

supply an advance copy of their 

statement to participate, if those persons 

have made advance alternative 

arrangements with the Building 

Technologies Program. Requests to give 

an oral presentation should ask for such 

alternative arrangements. 

C. Conduct of Public Meeting 

DOE will designate a DOE official to 

preside at the public meeting and may 

use a professional facilitator to aid 

discussion. The meeting will not be a 

judicial or evidentiary-type public 

hearing, but DOE will conduct it in 

accordance with section 336 of EPCA 

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

be present to record the proceedings and 

prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the 

right to schedule the order of 

presentations and to establish the 

procedures governing the conduct of the 

public meeting. 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 presentations by 

participants, and encourage all 

interested parties to share their views on 

issues affecting this rulemaking. Each 

participant will be allowed to make a 

prepared general statement (within time 

limits determined by DOE), before the 

discussion of specific topics. DOE will 

permit other participants to comment 

briefly on any general statements. At the 

end of all prepared statements on each 

specific topic, DOE will permit 

participants to clarify their statements 

briefly and to comment on statements 

made by others. 

Participants should be prepared to 

answer DOE’s and other participants’ 

questions. DOE representatives may also 

ask participants about 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. 

DOE will make the entire record of 

this proposed rulemaking, including the 

transcript from the public meeting, 

available for inspection at the U.S. 

Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 

20024, (202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. Copies of the 

transcript are available for purchase 

from the transcribing reporter. 

D. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding the proposed rule 

before or after the public meeting, but 

no later than the date provided at the 

beginning of this notice. Comments, 

data, and information submitted to 

DOE’s e-mail address for this 

rulemaking should be provided in 

WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or 

text (ASCII) file format. Interested 

parties should avoid the use of special 

characters or any form of encryption, 

and wherever possible, comments 

should include the electronic signature 

of the author. Comments, data, and 

information submitted to DOE via mail 

or hand delivery/courier should include 

one signed original paper copy. No 

telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 

person submitting information that he 

or she believes to be confidential and 

exempt by law from public disclosure 

should submit two copies: One copy of 

the document that includes all of the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document with that 

information deleted. DOE will 

determine the confidential status of the 

information and treat it accordingly. 

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 was previously made 

available to others without obligation 

concerning its confidentiality; (5) an 

explanation of the competitive injury to 

the submitting person that 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. 

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment 

DOE is particularly interested in 

receiving comments and views of 

interested parties on the following 

issues: 

1. Incorporation of IEC Standard 62301. 

DOE invites comment on the adequacy of IEC 

Standard 62301 to measure standby power 

for clothes dryers and room air conditioners 

in general, and on the suitability of 

incorporating into DOE regulations the 

following specific provisions from IEC 

Standard 62301: Section 4 (‘‘General 

conditions for measurements’’), paragraph 

4.2, ‘‘Test room,’’, paragraph 4.3 ‘‘Power 

supply’’ (for room air conditioners only), 

paragraph 4.4, ‘‘Supply voltage waveform,’’ 

and paragraph 4.5, ‘‘Power measurement 

accuracy,’’ and section 5 (‘‘Measurements’’), 

paragraph 5.1, ‘‘General’’ and paragraph 5.3, 

‘‘Procedure.’’ (See section III.B.1.) 

2. ‘‘Standby mode’’ definitions. DOE invites 

comment on the proposed definition of 

‘‘standby mode,’’ which is based on the 

definition provided in IEC Standard 62301 

CDV. (See section III.B.2.) 

3. Clothes dryer standby modes. DOE 

invites comment on the establishment of 

inactive mode as the only standby mode for 

clothes dryers and the determination that 

delay start mode and cycle finished mode 

would not be considered standby modes. 

DOE further invites comment on the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37643 

proposed mode definitions and on the 

question of whether there are any modes 

consistent with the ‘‘active mode,’’ ‘‘standby 

mode,’’ or ‘‘off mode’’ definitions under the 

proposed definitions that have not been 

identified and that can represent significant 

energy use. (See section III.B.2.) 

4. Room air conditioner standby modes. 

DOE invites comment on the establishment 

of inactive mode as the only standby mode 

for room air conditioners and the 

determination that delay start mode and offcycle mode would not be considered standby 

modes. DOE further invites comment on the 

proposed mode definitions and on the 

question of whether there are any modes 

consistent with the ‘‘active mode,’’ ‘‘standby 

mode,’’ or ‘‘off mode’’ definitions under the 

proposed definitions that have not been 

identified and that can represent significant 

energy use. (See section III.B.2.) 

5. Network mode. DOE welcomes comment 

on whether clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners are currently available that 

incorporate a networking function and 

whether definitions and testing procedures 

for a network mode should be incorporated 

into the DOE test procedure. DOE also 

requests comment on appropriate 

methodologies for measuring energy 

consumption in a network mode, and data on 

the results and repeatability of such testing 

methodology. (See section III.B.2.) 

6. Test room conditions. DOE requests 

comment on the proposed room ambient 

temperature range for standby mode and off 

mode power measurements for room air 

conditioners and clothes dryers. (See section 

III.B.3.) 

7. Energy-use calculation for standby mode 

and off mode for clothes dryers. DOE invites 

comment on the approach for determining 

total energy use for standby mode and off 

mode for clothes dryers, including its 

accuracy and test burden. DOE also invites 

comment and requests data on the estimates 

for annual hours associated with each mode, 

including the 140 hours specified by the 

current test procedure for active mode 

(drying). (See section III.B.4.a.) 

8. Energy-use calculation for standby mode 

and off mode for room air conditioners. DOE 

invites comment on the approach for 

determining total energy use for standby 

mode and off mode for room air conditioners, 

including its accuracy and test burden. DOE 

also invites comment and requests data on 

the estimates for annual hours associated 

with each mode, including the estimate of 

‘‘unplugged’’ time. (See section III.B.4.b.) 

9. Clothes dryer testing procedures to 

account for automatic cycle termination. 

DOE invites comment on the adequacy of 

AS/NZS Standard 2442, along with proposed 

definitions and clarifications, to measure 

energy consumption for timer and automatic 

termination control clothes dryers to account 

for over-drying energy consumption. DOE 

further invites comments on whether the 

proposed FU factor credits for timer and 

automatic termination control dryers, along 

with the revised calculations for per-cycle 

energy consumption, are appropriate. In 

addition, DOE welcomes comment on 

whether a final RMC of 5 percent is 

appropriate, and, if not, what a representative 

final RMC would be. DOE also welcomes 

data from dryers tested according to the 

proposed test procedure, in particular for 

units which minimally comply with current 

energy conservation standards, as well as 

data showing whether one sensor technology 

is more accurate, and reduces over-drying, 

than another. (See section III.C.2.) 

10. Water temperature for clothes dryer test 

load preparation. DOE invites comment on 

whether the existing water temperature of 

100° ± 5 °F for test load preparation in the 

existing test procedure is representative of 

consumer usage habits, and, if not, what 

would be a representative value. DOE also 

requests data quantifying how changes to the 

water temperature for clothes dryer test load 

preparation would affect the measured 

efficiency as compared to the existing DOE 

test procedure, in particular for those units 

that are minimally compliant with current 

energy conservation standards. 

11. Cycles and settings for timer dryer and 

automatic termination control dryer testing. 

DOE invites comment on whether using the 

maximum temperature setting for timer 

dryers is representative of current consumer 

usage habits. DOE also invites comment on 

whether the proposed cycles and settings for 

the automatic termination control dryer tests 

are representative of current consumer usage 

habits. DOE requests comment on whether 

multiple cycles and settings should be tested 

and how the results from those multiple tests 

should be evaluated, and if so, how testing 

multiple cycles and settings would affect the 

measured efficiency as compared to the 

existing DOE clothes dryer test procedure. 

(See section III.C.2.) 

12. Cool-down period for automatic 

termination control dryer testing. DOE 

welcomes comment on whether the cooldown period should be included as part of 

the active mode test cycle for automatic 

termination control dryers. In addition, DOE 

also welcomes data quantifying how 

including the cool-down period in the test 

cycle would affect the measured efficiency of 

clothes dryers as compared to the existing 

DOE test procedure, in particular for those 

units that are minimally compliant with 

current energy conservation standards. (See 

section III.C.2.) 

13. Incorporation of testing procedures for 

vent-less clothes dryers. DOE invites 

comment on the adequacy of proposed 

definitions and installation conditions for 

vent-less clothes dryers, which are based 

upon the alternate test procedure adopted in 

the LG Petition for Waiver. DOE further 

invites comment on the proposed additional 

clarifications to the installation conditions, 

condensation boxes, dryer preconditioning, 

and testing conditions based on EN Standard 

61121 and Whirlpool’s proposed 

amendments. Finally, DOE requests comment 

and data on the water consumption of ventless clothes dryers and if measurement of 

water consumption should be included in the 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure. (See 

section III.C.3.) 

14. Number of valid clothes dryer test 

cycles. DOE invites comment and data 

suggesting that test-to-test variation is 

sufficient to warrant a requirement for more 

than one clothes dryer test cycle. (See section 

III.C.3) 

15. Detergent specifications for test cloth 

preconditioning. DOE invites comment on 

the proposed revisions to the detergent 

formulation and dosage specifications, 

requiring 60.8 g of AHAM standard test 

detergent Formula 3 for clothes dryer test 

cloth preconditioning. DOE also welcomes 

data showing the effects of changing the 

detergent specifications for test cloth 

preconditioning on the measured EF for 

clothes dryers. (See section III.C.4) 

16. Clothes dryer number of annual use 

cycles. DOE seeks comment on the proposed 

amendment to change the number of clothes 

dryer annual use cycles to 283 cycles for all 

product classes of clothes dryers based upon 

data from the 2005 RECS. (See section 

III.C.5.a.) 

17. Clothes dryer initial remaining 

moisture content. DOE seeks comment on the 

proposed amendments to the DOE clothes 

dryer test procedure to change the initial 

RMC to 47 percent ± 3.5 percent to reflect 

current consumer usage habits, based on the 

trends of the shipment-weighted average 

RMC of clothes washers shown in data 

submitted by AHAM. DOE further welcomes 

comment and data indicating an appropriate 

initial RMC and how that initial RMC would 

affect the measured EF of clothes dryers, in 

particular units that are minimally compliant 

with current energy conservation standards. 

(See section III.C.5.b.) 

18. Clothes Dryer Test Load Weight. DOE 

seeks comment on the proposed amendments 

to the DOE clothes dryer test procedure to 

change the clothes dryer test load size to 8.45 

lb ± .085 lb for standard-size dryers. DOE also 

welcomes data on clothes washer and clothes 

dryer test load sizes representative of current 

consumer usage habits for both compact-size 

and standard-size units. DOE further requests 

data on how any changes in test load size 

would affect the measured EF of clothes 

dryers, in particular units that are minimally 

compliant with current energy conservation 

standards. (See section III.C.5.c.) 

19. Room air conditioner annual operating 

hours. DOE seeks comment on the 

determination that the 750 annual operating 

hours specified by the current DOE test 

procedure for room air conditioners is still 

representative based upon data from the 2005 

RECS. (See section III.C.5.d.) 

20. Room air conditioner ambient test 

conditions. DOE invites comment and data 

indicating representative ambient test 

conditions for the DOE room air conditioner 

test procedure. DOE further requests data 

showing how any changes to the ambient 

conditions would affect the measured EER of 

room air conditioners, in particular units that 

are minimally compliant with current energy 

conservation standards. (See section III.C.5.f.) 

21. Room air conditioner referenced test 

procedures. DOE invites comment on the 

proposed amendments to update the 

references in the DOE room air conditioner 

test procedure to reference the latest ANSI 

and ASHRAE test standards, ANSI/AHAM 

RAC–1–R2008 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 

16–1983 (RA 2009). (See section III.C.6.) 

22. Clothes dryer referenced test procedure. 

DOE invites comment on the proposed 

amendments to update the reference in the 

DOE clothes dryer test procedure to reference 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37644 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

the latest AHAM clothes dryer test standard, 

AHAM Standard HLD–1–2009, and to 

eliminate the reference to obsolete AHAM 

Standard HLD–2EC. DOE also invites 

comment on whether the optional modified 

exhaust simulator in AHAM Standard HLD– 

1–2009 is appropriate for incorporation into 

the DOE clothes dryer test procedure. DOE 

seeks data comparing the effects of the two 

exhaust simulators in AHAM Standard HLD– 

1–2009 on the measured EF, in particular for 

units that minimally comply with current 

energy conservation standards. (See section 

III.C.7.) 

23. Technical correction for the per-cycle 

gas dryer continuously burning pilot light gas 

energy consumption. DOE seeks comment on 

its proposed correction to the calculation of 

the per-cycle gas dryer continuously burning 

pilot light gas energy consumption. (See 

section III.C.8.) 

24. Clarification of gas supply test 

conditions for gas clothes dryers. DOE seeks 

comment on its proposed clarifying language 

for specifying the natural gas and propane 

supply pressure conditions for testing gas 

clothes dryers. 

25. Effects of test procedure revisions on 

compliance with energy conservation 

standards. DOE invites comment on how the 

proposed amendments to the DOE test 

procedures for clothes dryers and room air 

conditioners will affect the measured 

efficiency of products. In particular, DOE 

seeks data showing how certain proposed 

amendments affect the EF or EER of 

minimally compliant clothes dryers or room 

air conditioners, respectively. (See section 

IV.) 

VII. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 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 June 11, 

2010. 

Cathy Zoi, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE proposes to amend part 

430 of chapter II of title 10, of the Code 

of Federal Regulations, to read as set 

forth below: 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

1. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2461 note. 

2. Section 430.3 is amended by: 

a. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(1) 

through (e)(9) as (e)(2) through (e)(10). 

b. Adding a new paragraph (e)(1). 

c. Adding a new paragraph (g)(2). 

d. Adding a new paragraph (g)(3). 

e. Adding a new paragraph (l)(3). 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 430.3 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) ANSI/ASHRAE 16–1983 (‘‘ANSI/ 

ASHRAE 16’’) (Reaffirmed 2009), 

Method of Testing for Rating Room Air 

Conditioners and Packaged Terminal 

Air Conditioners, approved December 1, 

1983, IBR approved for Appendix F to 

Subpart B. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(2) AHAM HLD–1–2009 (‘‘AHAM 

HLD–1’’), Household Tumble Type 

Clothes Dryers, approved October 2, 

2009, IBR approved for Appendix D1 to 

Subpart B. 

(3) ANSI/AHAM RAC–1–R2008 

(‘‘ANSI/AHAM RAC–1’’), Room Air 

Conditioners, ANSI approved July 7, 

2008, IBR approved for Appendix F to 

Subpart B. 

* * * * * 

(l) * * * 

(3) IEC 62301–2005–06 (‘‘IEC 62301’’), 

Household electrical appliances— 

Measurement of standby power (First 

Edition 2005–06), approved June 13, 

2005, IBR approved for Appendix D1 

and Appendix F to Subpart B. 

* * * * * 

3. Section 430.23 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (d) and (f) to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.23 Test procedures for the 

measurement of energy and water 

consumption. 

* * * * * 

(d) Clothes dryers. (1) The estimated 

annual operating cost for clothes dryers 

shall be– 

(i) For an electric clothes dryer, the 

product of the following three factors: 

(A) The representative average-use 

cycle of 283 cycles per year, 

(B) The total per-cycle electric dryer 

energy consumption in kilowatt-hours 

per-cycle, determined according to 4.1 

of appendix D to this subpart before the 

date that appendix D1 becomes 

mandatory and 4.2 of appendix D1 upon 

the date that appendix D1 to this 

subpart becomes mandatory (see the 

note at the beginning of appendix D1), 

and 

(C) The representative average unit 

cost in dollars per kilowatt-hour as 

provided by the Secretary, the resulting 

product then being rounded off to the 

nearest dollar per year, and 

(ii) For a gas clothes dryer, the 

product of the representative averageuse cycle of 283 cycles per year times 

the sum of: 

(A) The product of the per-cycle gas 

dryer electric energy consumption in 

kilowatt-hours per cycle, determined 

according to 4.2 of appendix D to this 

subpart before the date that appendix 

D1 becomes mandatory and 4.4 of 

appendix D1 upon the date that 

appendix D1 to this subpart becomes 

mandatory, times the representative 

average unit cost in dollars per kilowatthour as provided by the Secretary plus, 

(B) The product of the total gas dryer 

gas energy consumption per cycle, in 

Btu’s per cycle, determined according to 

4.5 of appendix D of this subpart before 

the date that appendix D1 becomes 

mandatory and 4.8 of appendix D1 upon 

the date that appendix D1 to this 

subpart becomes mandatory, times the 

representative average unit cost in 

dollars per Btu as provided by the 

Secretary, the resulting product then 

being rounded off to the nearest dollar 

per year. 

(2) The energy factor, expressed in 

pounds of clothes per kilowatt-hour, for 

clothes dryers shall be either the 

quotient of a 3-pound bone-dry test load 

for compact dryers, as defined by 2.7.1 

of appendix D to this subpart before the 

date that appendix D1 becomes 

mandatory or by 2.7.1 of appendix D1 

upon the date that appendix D1 to this 

subpart becomes mandatory, or the 

quotient of a 7-pound bone-dry test load 

for standard dryers, as defined by 2.7.2 

of appendix D to this subpart before the 

date that appendix D1 becomes 

mandatory or an 8.45-pound bone-dry 

test load for standard dryers, as defined 

by 2.7.2 of appendix D1 upon the date 

that appendix D1 to this subpart 

becomes mandatory, as applicable, 

divided by the clothes dryer energy 

consumption per cycle, as determined 

according to 4.1 for electric clothes 

dryers and 4.6 for gas clothes dryers of 

appendix D to this subpart before the 

date that appendix D1 becomes 

mandatory and 4.2 for electric clothes 

dryers and 4.9 for gas clothes dryers of 

appendix D1 upon the date that 

appendix D1 to this subpart becomes 

mandatory, the resulting quotient then 

being rounded off to the nearest 

hundredth (.01). 

(3) The combined energy factor, 

expressed in pounds of clothes per 

kilowatt-hour, for clothes dryers shall be 

either the quotient of a 3-pound bonedry test load for compact dryers, as 

defined by 2.7.1 of appendix D1 to this 

subpart, or the quotient of a 8.45-pound 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37645 

bone-dry test load for standard dryers, 

as defined by 2.7.2 of appendix D1 to 

this subpart, as applicable, divided by 

the clothes dryer combined energy 

consumption per cycle, as determined 

according to 4.11 of appendix D1 to this 

subpart, the resulting quotient then 

being rounded off to the nearest 

hundredth (.01). 

(4) Other useful measures of energy 

consumption for clothes dryers shall be 

those measures of energy consumption 

for clothes dryers which the Secretary 

determines are likely to assist 

consumers in making purchasing 

decisions and which are derived from 

the application of appendix D to this 

subpart before the date that appendix 

D1 becomes mandatory and appendix 

D1 upon the date that appendix D1 to 

this subpart becomes mandatory. 

* * * * * 

(f) Room air conditioners. (1) The 

estimated annual operating cost for 

room air conditioners, expressed in 

dollars per year, shall be determined by 

multiplying the following three factors: 

(i) Electrical input power in kilowatts 

as determined in accordance with 5.2 of 

appendix F to this subpart, 

(ii) The representative average-use 

cycle of 750 hours of compressor 

operation per year, and 

(iii) A representative average unit cost 

of electrical energy in dollars per 

kilowatt-hour as provided by the 

Secretary, the resulting product then 

being rounded off to the nearest dollar 

per year. 

(2) The energy efficiency ratio for 

room air conditioners, expressed in 

Btu’s per watt-hour, shall be the 

quotient of: 

(i) The cooling capacity in Btu’s per 

hour as determined in accordance with 

5.1 of appendix F to this subpart 

divided by: 

(ii) The electrical input power in 

watts as determined in accordance with 

5.2 of appendix F to this subpart, the 

resulting quotient then being rounded 

off to the nearest 0.1 Btu per watt-hour. 

(3) The average annual energy 

consumption for room air conditioners, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per year, 

shall be determined by multiplying 

together the following two factors: 

(i) Electrical input power in kilowatts 

as determined in accordance with 5.2 of 

appendix F to this subpart, and 

(ii) The representative average-use 

cycle of 750 hours of compressor 

operation per year, the resulting product 

then being rounded off to the nearest 

kilowatt-hour per year. 

(4) The combined annual energy 

consumption for room air conditioners, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per year, 

shall be the sum of: 

(i) The average annual energy 

consumption as determined in 

accordance with paragraph (f)(3) of this 

section, and 

(ii) The standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption, as determined in 

accordance with 5.3 of appendix F to 

this subpart, the resulting sum then 

being rounded off to the nearest 

kilowatt-hour per year. 

(5) The combined energy efficiency 

ratio for room air conditioners, 

expressed in Btu’s per watt-hour, shall 

be the quotient of: 

(i) The cooling capacity in Btu’s per 

hour as determined in accordance with 

5.1 of appendix F to this subpart 

multiplied by the representative 

average-use cycle of 750 hours of 

compressor operation per year, divided 

by 

(ii) The combined annual energy 

consumption as determined in 

accordance with section (4) multiplied 

by a conversion factor of 1,000 to 

convert kilowatt-hours to watt-hours, 

the resulting quotient then being 

rounded off to the nearest 0.1 Btu per 

watt-hour. 

* * * * * 

4. Appendix D to subpart B of part 

430 is amended by adding a Note after 

the heading to read as follows: 

Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 430– 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers 

Note: Manufacturers must continue to use 

appendix D to subpart B of part 430 until the 

energy conservation standards for clothes 

dryers at 10 CFR 430.32(h) are amended to 

require mandatory compliance using 

appendix D1. 

* * * * * 

5. Appendix D1 is added to subpart B 

of part 430 to read as follows: 

Appendix D1 to Subpart B of Part 430– 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers 

Note: Appendix D1 to subpart B of part 430 

is informational only. Manufacturers must 

continue to use appendix D to subpart B of 

part 430 until the energy conservation 

standards for clothes dryers at 10 CFR 

430.32(h) are amended to require mandatory 

compliance using appendix D1. 

1. Definitions 

1.1 ‘‘Active mode’’ means a mode in 

which the clothes dryer is connected to a 

main power source, has been activated and 

is performing the main function of tumbling 

the clothing with or without heated or 

unheated forced air circulation to remove 

moisture from and/or remove or prevent 

wrinkling of the clothing. 

1.2 ‘‘AHAM’’ means the Association of 

Home Appliance Manufacturers. 

1.3 ‘‘Automatic termination control’’ 

means a dryer control system with a sensor 

which monitors either the dryer load 

temperature or its moisture content and with 

a controller which automatically terminates 

the drying process. A mark or detent which 

indicates a preferred automatic termination 

control setting must be present if the dryer 

is to be classified as having an ‘‘automatic 

termination control.’’ A mark is a visible 

single control setting on one or more dryer 

controls. 

1.4 ‘‘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 shall be tested as an 

automatic termination control dryer. 

1.5 ‘‘Bone dry’’ means 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. 

1.6 ‘‘Compact’’ or ‘‘compact size’’ means a 

clothes dryer with a drum capacity of less 

than 4.4 cubic feet. 

1.7 ‘‘Conventional clothes dryer’’ means a 

clothes dryer that exhausts the evaporated 

moisture from the cabinet. 

1.8 ‘‘Cool down’’ means that portion of the 

clothes drying cycle when the added gas or 

electric heat is terminated and the clothes 

continue to tumble and dry within the drum. 

1.9 ‘‘Cycle’’ means a sequence of 

operation of a clothes dryer which performs 

a clothes drying operation, and may include 

variations or combinations of the functions of 

heating, tumbling and drying. 

1.10 ‘‘Drum capacity’’ means the volume 

of the drying drum in cubic feet. 

1.11 ‘‘HLD–1’’ means the test standard 

published by the Association of Home 

Appliance Manufacturers, titled ‘‘Household 

Tumble Type Clothes Dryers’’, October 2009, 

AHAM HLD–1–2009 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

1.12 ‘‘IEC 62301’’ means the test standard 

published by the International 

Electrotechnical Commission, titled 

‘‘Household electrical appliances– 

Measurement of standby power,’’ Publication 

62301 (First Edition, 2005–06), IEC 62301– 

2005–06 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3). 

1.13 ‘‘Inactive mode’’ means a standby 

mode that facilitates the activation of active 

mode by remote switch (including remote 

control), internal sensor, or timer, or that 

provides continuous status display. 

1.14 ‘‘Moisture content’’ means 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. 

1.15 ‘‘Moisture sensing control’’ means a 

system which utilizes a moisture sensing 

element within the dryer drum that monitors 

the amount of moisture in the clothes and 

automatically terminates the dryer cycle. 

1.16 ‘‘Off mode’’ means a mode in which 

the clothes dryer is connected to a main 

power source and is not providing any active 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37646 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

or standby mode function, and where the 

mode may persist for an indefinite time. An 

indicator that only shows the user that the 

product is in the off position is included 

within the clasification of an off mode. 

1.17 ‘‘Standard size’’ means a clothes 

dryer with a drum capacity of 4.4 cubic feet 

or greater. 

1.18 ‘‘Standby mode’’ means any product 

modes where the energy using product is 

connected to a mains power source and offers 

one or more of the following user oriented or 

protective functions which may persist for an 

indefinite time: 

(a) To facilitate the activation of other 

modes (including activation or deactivation 

of active mode) by remote switch (including 

remote control), internal sensor, or timer. 

(b) Continuous functions, including 

information or status displays (including 

clocks) or sensor-based functions. A timer is 

a continuous clock function (which may or 

may not be associated with a display) that 

provides regular scheduled tasks (e.g., 

switching) and that operates on a continuous 

basis. 

1.19 ‘‘Temperature sensing control’’ 

means a system which monitors dryer 

exhaust air temperature and automatically 

terminates the dryer cycle. 

1.20 ‘‘Timer dryer’’ means a clothes dryer 

that can be preset to carry out at least one 

sequence of operations to be terminated by a 

timer, but may also be manually controlled. 

1.21 ‘‘Vent-less clothes dryer’’ means a 

clothes dryer that uses a closed-loop system 

with an internal condenser to remove the 

evaporated moisture from the heated air. The 

moist air is not discharged from the cabinet. 

2. Testing Conditions 

2.1 Installation. Install the clothes dryer 

in accordance with manufacturer’s 

instructions. For conventional clothes dryers, 

as defined in 1.7, the dryer exhaust shall be 

restricted by adding the AHAM exhaust 

simulator described in 3.3.5.1 of HLD–1 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). For 

vent-less clothes dryers, as defined in 1.21, 

the dryer shall be tested without the AHAM 

exhaust simulator. 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. All external 

joints should be taped to avoid air leakage. 

If the manufacturer gives the option to use a 

vent-less clothes dryer, as defined in 1.21, 

with or without a condensation box, the 

dryer shall be tested with the condensation 

box installed. For vent-less clothes dryers, 

the condenser unit of dryer must remain in 

place and not be taken out of the dryer for 

any reason between tests. 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, do not disconnect console 

lights or other lighting systems. 

2.2 Ambient temperature and humidity. 

2.2.1 For drying testing, maintain the 

room ambient air temperature at 75 ± 3 °F 

and the room relative humidity at 50 ± 10 

percent relative humidity. 

2.2.2 For standby and off mode testing, 

maintain room ambient air temperature 

conditions as specified in section 4, 

paragraph 4.2 of IEC 62301 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

2.3 Energy supply. 

2.3.1 Electrical supply. Maintain the 

electrical supply at the clothes dryer terminal 

block within 1 percent of 120/240 or 120/ 

208Y or 120 volts as applicable to the 

particular terminal block wiring system and 

within 1 percent of the nameplate frequency 

as specified by the manufacturer. If the dryer 

has a dual voltage conversion capability, 

conduct test at the highest voltage specified 

by the manufacturer. 

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 

4.4 of IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; 

see § 430.3). 

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 approximately that 

recommended by the manufacturer. The 

hourly Btu rating of the burner shall be 

maintained within ±5 percent of the rating 

specified by the manufacturer. 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 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 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 

approximately that recommended by the 

manufacturer. The hourly Btu rating of the 

burner shall be maintained within ±5 percent 

of the rating specified by the manufacturer. 

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 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 2.4.6. 

2.4 Instrumentation. Perform all test 

measurements using the following 

instruments as appropriate. 

2.4.1 Weighing scale for test cloth. The 

scale shall have a range of 0 to a maximum 

of 30 pounds with a resolution of at least 0.2 

ounces and a maximum error no greater than 

0.3 percent of any measured value within the 

range of 3 to 15 pounds. 

2.4.1.2 Weighing scale for drum capacity 

measurements. The scale should have a range 

of 0 to a maximum of 500 pounds with 

resolution of 0.50 pounds and a maximum 

error no greater than 0.5 percent of the 

measured value. 

2.4.2 Kilowatt-hour meter. The kilowatthour meter shall have a resolution of 0.001 

kilowatt-hours and a maximum error no 

greater than 0.5 percent of the measured 

value. 

2.4.3 Gas meter. The gas meter shall have 

a resolution of 0.001 cubic feet and a 

maximum error no greater than 0.5 percent 

of the measured value. 

2.4.4 Dry and wet bulb psychrometer. The 

dry and wet bulb psychrometer shall have an 

error no greater than ±1 °F. 

2.4.5 Temperature. The temperature 

sensor shall have an error no greater than ±1 

°F. 

2.4.6 Standard Continuous Flow 

Calorimeter. The Calorimeter shall have an 

operating range of 750 to 3,500 Btu per cubic 

feet. The maximum error of the basic 

calorimeter shall be no greater than 0.2 

percent of the actual heating value of the gas 

used in the test. The indicator readout shall 

have a maximum error no greater than 0.5 

percent of the measured value within the 

operating range and a resolution of 0.2 

percent of the full-scale reading of the 

indicator instrument. 

2.4.7 Standby mode and off mode watt 

meter. The watt meter used to measure 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption of the clothes dryer shall have 

the resolution specified in section 4, 

paragraph 4.5 of IEC 62301(incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). The watt meter shall 

also be able to record a ‘‘true’’ average power 

as specified in section 5, paragraph 5.3.2(a) 

of IEC 62301. 

2.5 Lint trap. Clean the lint trap 

thoroughly before each test run. 

2.6 Test Clothes. 

2.6.1 Energy test cloth. The energy test 

cloth shall be clean and consist of the 

following: 

(a) Pure finished bleached cloth, made 

with a momie or granite weave, which is a 

blended fabric of 50-percent cotton and 50- 

percent polyester and weighs within +10 

percent of 5.75 ounces per square yard after 

test cloth preconditioning, and has 65 ends 

on the warp and 57 picks on the fill. The 

individual warp and fill yarns are a blend of 

50-percent cotton and 50-percent polyester 

fibers. 

(b) Cloth material that is 24 inches by 36 

inches and has been hemmed to 22 inches by 

34 inches before washing. The maximum 

shrinkage after five washes shall not be more 

than 4 percent on the length and width. 

(c) The number of test runs on the same 

energy test cloth shall not exceed 25 runs. 

2.6.2 Energy stuffer cloths. The energy 

stuffer cloths shall be made from energy test 

cloth material, and shall consist of pieces of 

material that are 12 inches by 12 inches and 

have been hemmed to 10 inches by 10 inches 

before washing. The maximum shrinkage 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37647 

after five washes shall not be more than 4 

percent on the length and width. The number 

of test runs on the same energy stuffer cloth 

shall not exceed 25 runs after test cloth 

preconditioning. 

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 1.5. 

(2) Place 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 is to be controlled 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 1.5 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 Test loads. 

2.7.1 Compact size dryer load. Prepare a 

bone-dry test load of energy cloths which 

weighs 3.00 pounds ± .03 pounds. 

Adjustments to the test load to achieve the 

proper weight can be made by the use of 

energy stuffer cloths, with no more than five 

stuffer cloths per load. Dampen the load by 

agitating it in water whose temperature is 100 

°F ± 5 °F and consists of 0 to 17 parts per 

million hardness for approximately two 

minutes in order 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 42–47 percent of the 

bone-dry weight of the test load. Make a final 

mass adjustment, such that the moisture 

content is 47 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 which 

weighs 8.45 pounds ± .085 pounds. 

Adjustments to the test load to achieve the 

proper weight can be made by the use of 

energy stuffer cloths, with no more than five 

stuffer cloths per load. Dampen the load by 

agitating it in water whose temperature is 100 

°F ± 5 °F and consists of 0 to 17 parts per 

million hardness for approximately two 

minutes in order 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 42–47 percent of the 

bone-dry weight of the test load. Make a final 

mass adjustment, such that the moisture 

content is 47 percent ± 0.33 percent by 

adding water uniformly to the load in a very 

fine spray. 

2.7.3 Method of loading. Load the energy 

test cloths by grasping them in the center, 

shaking them to hang loosely, and then 

dropping them in the dryer at random. 

2.8 Clothes dryer preconditioning. 

2.8.1 Conventional clothes dryers. For 

conventional clothes dryers, before any test 

cycle, operate the dryer without a test load 

in the non-heat mode for 15 minutes or until 

the discharge air temperature is varying less 

than 1 °F for 10 minutes—whichever is 

longer—in the test installation location with 

the ambient conditions within the specified 

test condition tolerances of 2.2. 

2.8.2 Vent-less clothes dryers. For ventless clothes dryers, before any test cycle, the 

steady-state temperature must be equal to 

ambient room temperature described in 2.2.1. 

This can be done by leaving the machine at 

ambient room conditions for at least 12 hours 

but not more than 36 hours between tests. 

3. Test Procedures and Measurements 

3.1 Drum Capacity. Measure the drum 

capacity by sealing all openings in the drum 

except the loading port with a plastic bag, 

and ensure that all corners and depressions 

are filled and that there are no extrusions of 

the plastic bag through the opening in the 

drum. Support the dryer’s rear drum surface 

on a platform scale to prevent deflection of 

the dryer, and record the weight of the empty 

dryer. Fill the drum with water to a level 

determined by the intersection of the door 

plane and the loading port. Record the 

temperature of the water and then the weight 

of the dryer with the added water and then 

determine the mass of the water in pounds. 

Add or subtract the appropriate volume 

depending on whether or not the plastic bag 

protrudes into the drum interior. The drum 

capacity is calculated as follows: 

C=w/d 

C= capacity in cubic feet. 

w= weight of water in pounds. 

d= density of water at the measured 

temperature in pounds per cubic feet. 

3.2 Dryer Loading. Load the dryer as 

specified in 2.7. 

3.3 Test cycle 

3.3.1 Timer dryers. For timer dryers, as 

defined in 1.20, operate the clothes dryer at 

the maximum temperature setting and, if 

equipped with a timer, at the maximum time 

setting and dry the load until the moisture 

content of the test load is between 5 and 6 

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. 

Record the data specified by section 3.4. 

Repeat the procedure to dry the load until the 

moisture content of the test load is between 

4 and 5 percent of the bone-dry weight of the 

test load. If the dryer automatically stops 

during a cycle and the reason is that the 

condensation box is full of water, the test is 

stopped, and the test run is invalid. The first 

test cycle after a period of non-operation 

longer than 36 hours for vent-less dryers, as 

defined in 1.21, shall not be used for 

evaluation. For vent-less dryers, 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 1.4, a ‘‘normal’’ program 

shall be selected for the test cycle. Where the 

drying temperature can be chosen 

independently of the program, it shall be set 

to the maximum. Operate the clothes dryer 

and monitor the dryer as it progresses 

through the program. When the heater 

switches off for the final time, immediately 

before the cool-down period begins, stop the 

dryer. Record the data specified by 3.4. If the 

final moisture content is greater than 5 

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 and the 

reason is that the condensation box is full of 

water, the test is stopped, and the test run is 

invalid. The first test cycle after a period of 

non-operation longer than 36 hours for ventless dryers, as defined in 1.21, shall not be 

used for evaluation. For vent-less dryers, 

during the time between two cycles, the door 

of the dryer shall be closed except for loading 

(and unloading). 

3.4 Data recording. Record for each test 

cycle: 

3.4.1 Bone-dry weight of the test load 

described in 2.7. 

3.4.2 Moisture content of the wet test 

load before the test, as described in 2.7. 

3.4.3 Moisture content of the dry test load 

obtained after the test described in 3.3. 

3.4.4 Test room conditions, temperature, 

and percent relative humidity described in 

2.2.1. 

3.4.5 For electric dryers—the total 

kilowatt-hours of electric energy, Et, 

consumed during the test described in 3.3. 

3.4.6 For gas dryers: 

3.4.6.1 Total kilowatt-hours of electrical 

energy, Ete, consumed during the test 

described in 3.3. 

3.4.6.2 Cubic feet of gas per cycle, Etg, 

consumed during the test described in 3.3. 

3.4.6.3 On gas dryers using a 

continuously burning pilot light—the cubic 

feet of gas, Epg, consumed by the gas pilot 

light in one hour. 

3.4.6.4 Correct the gas heating value, 

GEF, as measured in 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.2.2, to 

standard pressure and temperature 

conditions in accordance with U.S. Bureau of 

Standards, circular C417, 1938. 

3.4.7 The cycle settings selected for the 

automatic termination control dryer test in 

3.3.2. 

3.5 Test for automatic termination field 

use factor credits. Credit for automatic 

termination can be claimed for those dryers 

which meet the requirements for either 

temperature-sensing control, 1.19, or 

moisture-sensing control, 1.15, and having 

present the appropriate mark or detent feed 

defined in 1.3. 

3.6 Standby mode and off mode power. 

Establish the testing conditions set forth in 

Section 2, ‘‘Testing Conditions,’’ of this 

appendix, omitting the requirement to 

disconnect all console light or other lighting 

systems on the clothes dryer that do not 

consume more than 10 watts during the 

clothes dryer test cycle in section 2.1. Prior 

to the initiation of the test measurements, the 

clothes dryer should be configured in the 

settings that produce the highest power 

consumption level, consistent with the 

particular mode definition under test. If the 

clothes dryer waits in a higher power state 

at the start of standby mode or off mode 

before dropping to a lower power state, as 

discussed in section 5, paragraph 5.1, note 1 

of IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3),wait until the clothes dryer passes 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37648 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

into the lower power state before starting the 

measurement. Follow the test procedure 

specified in section 5, paragraph 5.3 of IEC 

62301 for testing in each possible mode as 

described in 3.6.1 and 3.6.2, except allowing 

the product to stabilize for 30 to 40 minutes 

and using an energy use measurement period 

of 10 minutes. For units in which power 

varies over a cycle, as described in section 5, 

paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301, use the average 

power approach described in paragraph 

5.3.2(a) of IEC 62301, except allowing the 

product to stabilize for 30 to 40 minutes and 

using an energy use measurement period not 

less than 10 minutes. 

3.6.1 If a clothes dryer has an inactive 

mode, as defined in 1.13, 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 1.16, 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 Per-cycle electric timer dryer energy 

consumption for 5-percent final moisture 

content. Calculate the electric timer dryer 

energy consumption per cycle, Et, expressed 

in kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined as: 

Et = Et1 + [(RMC1¥RMC3) × (Et2¥Et1)/ 

(RMC1¥RMC2)], 

Et1 = the energy recorded in 3.4.5 for the test 

described in 3.3 for timer dryers for a 

final moisture content between 5 and 6 

percent. 

Et2 = the energy recorded in 3.4.5 for the test 

described in 3.3 for timer dryers for a 

final moisture content between 4 and 5 

percent. 

RMC1 = the moisture content in 3.4.3 for the 

test described in 3.3 for timer dryers for 

a final moisture content between 5 and 

6 percent. 

RMC2 = the moisture content in 3.4.3 for the 

test described in 3.3 for timer dryers for 

a final moisture content between 4 and 

5 percent. 

RMC3 = 5 percent. 

4.2 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 × FU, 

Where 

Et = the energy calculated in 4.1 for timer 

dryers or recorded in 3.4.5 for automatic 

termination control dryers 

FU = Field use factor 

=1.18 for timer dryers, as defined in 1.20. 

=1.0 for automatic termination control 

dryers, as defined in 1.4. 

4.3 Per-cycle gas timer dryer 

electrical energy consumption for 5- 

percent final moisture content. 

Calculate the gas timer dryer electrical 

energy consumption per cycle, Ete,

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle 

and defined as: 

Ete = Ete1 + [(RMC1¥RMC3) × (Ete2¥Ete1)/ 

(RMC1¥RMC2)], 

Where 

Ete1 = the energy recorded in 3.4.6.1 for the 

test described in 3.3 for timer dryers for 

a final moisture content between 5 and 

6 percent. 

Ete2 = the energy recorded in 3.4.6.1 for the 

test described in 3.3 for timer dryers for 

a final moisture content between 4 and 

5 percent. 

RMC1, RMC2, RMC3 as defined in 4.1. 

4.4 Total 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 × FU, 

Where 

Ete = the energy calculated in 4.3 for timer 

dryers or recorded in 3.4.6.1 for 

automatic termination control dryers. 

FU = as defined in 4.2. 

4.5 Per-cycle gas timer dryer gas 

energy consumption for 5-percent final 

moisture content. Calculate the gas 

timer dryer energy consumption per 

cycle, Etg, expressed in Btu’s per cycle 

and defined as: 

Etg = Etg1 + [(RMC1¥RMC3) × 

(Etg2¥Etg1)/(RMC1¥RMC2), 

Where 

Etg1 = the energy recorded in 3.4.6.2 for the 

test described in 3.3 for timer dryers for 

a final moisture content between 5 and 

6 percent. 

Etg2 = the energy recorded in 3.4.6.2 for the 

test described in 3.3 for timer dryers for 

a final moisture content between 4 and 

5 percent. 

RMC1, RMC2, RMC3 as defined in 4.1. 

4.6 Total per-cycle gas dryer gas 

energy consumption. Calculate the gas 

dryer gas energy consumption per cycle, 

Egg, expressed in Btu’s per cycle and 

defined as: 

Egg = Etg × FU × GEF, 

Where 

Etg = the energy calculated in 4.5 for timer 

dryers or recorded in 3.4.6.2 for 

automatic termination control dryers. 

FU = as defined in 4.2. 

GEF = corrected gas heat value (Btu per cubic 

feet) as defined in 3.4.6.4. 

4.7 Per-cycle gas dryer continuously 

burning pilot light gas energy 

consumption. Calculate the gas dryer 

continuously burning pilot light gas 

energy consumption per cycle, Eup, 

expressed in Btu’s per cycle and defined 

as: 

Eup = Epg × ((8760 ¥ 140)/283) × GEF, 

Epg = the energy recorded in 3.4.6.3 

8760 = number of hours in a year 

283 = representative average number of 

clothes dryer cycles in a year 

140 = estimated number of hours that 

the continuously burning pilot light 

is on during the operation of the 

clothes dryer for the representative 

average use cycle for clothes dryers 

(283 cycles per year) 

GEF as defined in 4.6 

4.8 Total per-cycle gas dryer gas 

energy consumption expressed in Btu’s. 

Calculate the total gas dryer energy 

consumption per cycle, Eg, expressed in 

Btu’s per cycle and defined as: 

Eg = Egg + Eup

Egg as defined in 4.6 

Eup as defined in 4.7 

4.9 Total per-cycle gas dryer energy 

consumption expressed in kilowatthours. Calculate the total gas dryer 

energy consumption per cycle, Ecg, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle 

and defined as: 

Ecg = Ege + (Eg/3412 Btu/kWh) 

Ege as defined in 4.4 

Eg as defined in 4.8 

4.10 Per-cycle standby mode and off 

mode energy consumption. Calculate 

the dryer inactive mode and off mode 

energy consumption per cycle, ETSO, 

expressed in kWh per cycle and defined 

as: 

ETSO = [(PIA × SIA) + (POFF × SOFF)] × K/ 

283 

Where: 

PIA= dryer inactive mode power, in watts, as 

measured in section 3.6.1; 

POFF = dryer off mode power, in watts, as 

measured in section 3.6.2. 

If the clothes dryer has both inactive 

mode and off mode, SIA and SOFF both 

equal 8,620 ÷ 2 = 4,310, where 8,620 is 

the total inactive and off mode annual 

hours; 

If the clothes dryer has an inactive 

mode but no off mode, the inactive 

mode annual hours, SIA, is equal to 

8,620 and the off mode annual hours, 

SOFF, is equal to 0; 

If the clothes dryer has an off mode 

but no inactive mode, SIA is equal to 0 

and SOFF is equal to 8,156 

Where 

K = 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for 

watt-hours to kilowatt-hours; and 

283 = representative average number of 

clothes dryer cycles in a year. 

4.11 Per-cycle combined total energy 

consumption expressed in kilowatthours. Calculate the per-cycle combined 

total energy consumption, ECC,

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle 

and defined for an electric clothes dryer 

as: 

ECC = Ece + ETSO

Where: 

Ece = the energy recorded in 4.2, and 

ETSO = the energy recorded in 4.10, 

and defined for a gas clothes dryer as: 

ECC = Ecg + ETSO


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 37649 

Where: 

Ecg = the energy recorded in 4.9, and 

ETSO = the energy recorded in 4.10. 

6. Appendix F to subpart B of part 430 

is revised to read as follows: 

Appendix F to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Room Air 

Conditioners 

Note: Manufacturers are not required to use 

the test procedures and calculations that refer 

to standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption, (specifically, sections 2.2, 3.2, 

4.2, and 5.3 of this appendix F) until the 

mandatory compliance date of amended 

energy conservation standards for room air 

conditioners at 10 CFR 430.32(b). 

1. Definitions 

1.1 ‘‘Active mode’’ means a mode in 

which the room air conditioner is connected 

to a mains power source, has been activated 

and is performing the main function of 

cooling or heating the conditioned space, or 

circulating air through activation of its fan or 

blower, with or without energizing active aircleaning components or devices such as 

ultraviolet (UV) radiation, electrostatic filters, 

ozone generators, or other air-cleaning 

devices. 

1.2 ‘‘ANSI/AHAM RAC–1’’ means the test 

standard published by jointly by the 

American National Standards Institute and 

the Association of Home Appliance 

Manufacturers, titled ‘‘Room Air 

Conditioners,’’ Standard RAC–1–2008 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

1.3 ‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 16’’ means the test 

standard published by jointly by the 

American National Standards Institute and 

the American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers, titled ‘‘Method of Testing for 

Rating Room Air Conditioners and Packaged 

Terminal Air Conditioners,’’ Standard 16– 

1983 (reaffirmed 2009) (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

1.4 ‘‘IEC 62301’’ means the test standard 

published by the International 

Electrotechnical Commission, titled 

‘‘Household electrical appliances— 

Measurement of standby power,’’ Publication 

62301 (First Edition 2005–06), IEC 62301– 

2005–6 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3). 

1.5 ‘‘Inactive mode’’ means a standby 

mode that facilitates the activation of active 

mode by remote switch (including remote 

control) or internal sensor or which provides 

continuous status display. 

1.6 ‘‘Off mode’’ means a mode in which 

a room air conditioner is connected to a 

mains power source and is not providing any 

active or standby mode function and where 

the mode may persist for an indefinite time. 

An indicator that only shows the user that 

the product is in the off position is included 

within the clasification of an off mode. 

1.7 ‘‘Standby mode’’ means any product 

modes where the where the energy using 

product is connected to a mains power 

source and offers one or more of the 

following user oriented or protective 

functions which may persist for an indefinite 

time: 

(a) To facilitate the activation of other 

modes (including activation or deactivation 

of active mode) by remote switch (including 

remote control), internal sensor, or timer. 

(b) Continuous functions, including 

information or status displays (including 

clocks) or sensor-based functions. A timer is 

a continuous clock function (which may or 

may not be associated with a display) that 

provides regular scheduled tasks (e.g., 

switching) and that operates on a continuous 

basis. 

2. Test Methods 

2.1 Cooling. The test method for testing 

room air conditioners in cooling mode shall 

consist of application of the methods and 

conditions in ANSI/AHAM RAC–1 sections 

4, 5, 6.1, and 6.5 (incorporated by reference; 

see § 430.3), and in ANSI/ASHRAE 16 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

2.2 Standby and off modes. The method 

for testing room air conditioners in standby 

and off modes shall consist of application of 

the methods and conditions in IEC 62301 

(incorporated by reference; see § 430.3), as 

modified by the requirements of this 

standard. The testing may be conducted in 

test facilities used for testing cooling 

performance. If testing is not conducted in 

such a facility, the test facility shall comply 

with IEC 62301 section 4.2. 

3. Test Conditions 

3.1 Cooling mode. Establish the test 

conditions described in sections 4 and 5 of 

ANSI/AHAM RAC–1 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3) and in accordance 

with ANSI/ASHRAE 16 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

3.2 Standby and off modes. 

3.2.1 Test room conditions. Maintain the 

indoor test conditions as required by section 

4.2 of IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; 

see § 430.3). If the standby and off mode 

testing is conducted in a facility that is also 

used for testing cooling performance, 

maintain the outdoor test conditions either as 

required by section 4.2 of IEC 62301or as 

described in section 3.1. If the unit is 

equipped with an outdoor air ventilation 

damper, close this damper during testing. 

3.2.2 Power supply. Maintain power 

supply conditions specified in section 4.3 of 

IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference; see 

§ 430.3). Use room air conditioner nameplate 

voltage and frequency as the basis for power 

supply conditions. Maintain power supply 

voltage waveform according to the 

requirements of section 4.4 of IEC 62301. 

3.2.3 Watt meter. The watt meter used to 

measure standby mode and off mode power 

consumption of the room air conditioner 

shall have the resolution specified in section 

4, paragraph 4.5 of IEC 62301 (incorporated 

by reference; see § 430.3). The watt meter 

shall also be able to record a ‘‘true’’ average 

power specified in section 5, paragraph 

5.3.2(a) of IEC 62301. 

4. Measurements 

4.1 Cooling mode. Measure the quantities 

delineated in section 5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC– 

1 (incorporated by reference; see § 430.3). 

4.2 Standby and off modes. Establish the 

testing conditions set forth in section 3.2. 

Prior to the initiation of the test 

measurements, the room air conditioner 

should be configured in the settings that 

produce the highest power consumption 

level, consistent with the particular mode 

definition under test. For room air 

conditioners that drop from a higher power 

state to a lower 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 room air 

conditioner to reach the lower power state 

before proceeding with the test measurement. 

Follow the test procedure specified in section 

5, paragraph 5.3 of IEC 62301 for testing in 

each possible mode as described in 4.2.1 and 

4.2.2, except allowing the product to stabilize 

for 5 to 10 minutes and using an energy use 

measurement period of 5 minutes. For units 

in which power varies over a cycle, as 

described in section 5, paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 

62301, use the average power approach in 

paragraph 5.3.2(a). 

4.2.1 If a room air conditioner has an 

inactive mode, as defined in 1.5, measure 

and record the average inactive mode power 

of the room air conditioner, PIA, in watts. 

4.2.2 If a room air conditioner has an off 

mode, as defined in 1.6, measure and record 

the average off mode power of the room air 

conditioner, POFF, in watts. 

5. Calculations 

5.1 Calculate the cooling capacity 

(expressed in Btu/hr) as required in section 

6.1 of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3) and in accordance 

with ANSI/ASHRAE 16 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

5.2 Determine the electrical power input 

(expressed in watts) as required by section 

6.5 of ANSI/AHAM RAC–1 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3) and in accordance 

with ANSI/ASHRAE 16 (incorporated by 

reference; see § 430.3). 

5.3 Standby mode and off mode annual 

energy consumption. Calculate the standby 

mode and off mode annual energy 

consumption for room air conditioners, ETSO, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per year, 

according to the following: 

ETSO = [(PIA × SIA) + (POFF × SOFF)] × K 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
37650 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Where: 

PIA= room air conditioner inactive mode 

power, in watts, as measured in section 

4.2.1 

POFF = room air conditioner off mode power, 

in watts, as measured in section 4.2.2. 

If the room air conditioner has both inactive 

mode and off mode, SIA and SOFF both 

equal 5,115 ÷ 2 = 2,557.5, where 5,115 

is the total inactive and off mode annual 

hours; 

If the room air conditioner has an inactive 

mode but no off mode, the inactive mode 

annual hours, SIA, is equal to 5,115 and 

the off mode annual hours, SOFF, is equal 

to 0; 

If the room air conditioner has an off mode 

but no inactive mode, SIA is equal to 0 

and 

SOFF is equal to STOT; 

K = 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for 

watt-hours to kilowatt-hours. 

[FR Doc. 2010–15025 Filed 7–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS