This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

13901 

Vol. 87, No. 48 

Friday, March 11, 2022 

1Because Congress included commercial prerinse 

spray valves in Part B of Title III of EPCA, the 

consumer product provisions of Part B (rather than 

the industrial equipment provisions of Part C) apply 

to commercial prerinse spray valves. However, 

because commercial prerinse spray valves are 

commonly considered to be commercial equipment, 

as a matter of administrative convenience and to 

minimize confusion among interested parties, DOE 

codified the requirements for commercial prerinse 

spray valves into subpart O of 10 CFR part 431. Part 

431 contains DOE regulations for commercial and 

industrial equipment. DOE refers to commercial 

prerinse spray valves as either ‘‘products’’ or 

‘‘equipment.’’ 

2All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the Energy Act 

of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020). 

3For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 431 

[EERE–2019–BT–TP–0025] 

RIN 1904–AE55 

Energy Conservation Program: Test 

Procedure for Commercial Prerinse 

Spray Valves 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule incorporates by 

reference the current version of the 

industry testing standard for 

commercial prerinse spray valves, 

which will not substantively change the 

current test procedure. The Department 

of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) also amends the 

definition of commercial prerinse spray 

valve to codify existing guidance on 

how to apply the definition. This 

amended definition do not change the 

current scope of the test procedure. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

April 11, 2022. The final rule changes 

will be mandatory for product testing 

starting September 7, 2022. The 

incorporation by reference of certain 

material listed in this rule is approved 

by the Director of the Federal Register 

on April 11, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes 

Federal Register notices, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials, is available for 

review at www.regulations.gov. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

However, some documents listed in the 

index, such as those containing 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure, may not be publicly 

available. 

A link to the docket web page can be 

found at www.regulations.gov/docket/ 

EERE-2019-BT-TP-0025. The docket 

web page contains instructions on how 

to access all documents, including 

public comments, in the docket. 

For further information on how to 

review the docket contact the Appliance 

and Equipment Standards Program staff 

at (202) 287–1445 or by email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC, 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586– 

0371. Email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Kathryn McIntosh, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of the 

General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC, 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586– 

2002. Email: Kathryn.McIntosh@

hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 

incorporates by reference the following 

industry standard into 10 Code of 

Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) part 431: 

ASTM F2324–13 (R2019), ‘‘Standard 

Test Method for Prerinse Spray Valves;’’ 

Approved May 1, 2019 (‘‘ASTM F2324– 

13’’). 

Copies of ASTM F2324–13 (R2019) 

can be obtained from ASTM 

International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO 

Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 

19428–2959, (610) 832–9585 or by going 

to www.astm.org. 

For a further discussion of this 

standard, see section IV.N of this 

document. 

Table of Contents 

I. Authority and Background 

A. Authority 

B. Background 

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope and Definition 

B. Updates to Industry Standards 

C. Water Pressure 

D. Test Procedure Costs 

E. Effective and Compliance Dates 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under 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 

M. Congressional Notification 

N. Description of Materials Incorporated by 

Reference 

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Authority and Background 

Commercial prerinse spray valves 

(‘‘CPSVs’’) are included among the 

‘‘covered products’’ for which the U.S. 

Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is 

authorized to establish and amend 

energy conservation standards and test 

procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6291(33); 42 

U.S.C. 6293(b)(14); 42 U.S.C. 6295(dd)) 

DOE’s energy conservation standards 

and test procedures for commercial 

prerinse spray valves are currently 

prescribed at 10 CFR part 431, subpart 

O.1 The following sections discuss 

DOE’s authority to establish test 

procedures for CPSVs and relevant 

background information regarding 

DOE’s consideration of test procedures 

for this product. 

A. Authority 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’),2 authorizes 

DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of 

a number of consumer products and 

certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6317) Title III, Part B 3 of EPCA 

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles, which sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency. EPCA 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
13902 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

4The parenthetical reference provides a reference 

for information located in the docket of DOE’s 

rulemaking to develop test procedures for CPSVs. 

(Docket No. EERE–2019–BT–TP–0025, which is 

maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references 

are arranged as follows: (commenter name, 

comment docket ID number, page of that 

document). 

provides definitions for commercial 

prerinse spray valves under 42 U.S.C. 

6291(33), the test procedure under 42 

U.S.C. 6293(b)(14), and energy 

conservation standards for flow rate 

under 42 U.S.C. 6295(dd). 

The energy conservation program 

under EPCA consists essentially of four 

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

Federal energy conservation standards, 

and (4) certification and enforcement 

procedures. Relevant provisions of 

EPCA specifically include definitions 

(42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 

U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 

U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation 

standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the 

authority to require information and 

reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 

6296). 

The testing requirements consist of 

test procedures that manufacturers of 

covered products must use as the basis 

for (1) certifying to DOE that their 

products comply with the applicable 

energy conservation standards adopted 

under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) 

making representations about the 

efficiency of those products (42 U.S.C. 

6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these 

test procedures to determine whether 

the products comply with any relevant 

standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(s)) 

Federal energy efficiency 

requirements for covered products 

established under EPCA generally 

supersede State laws and regulations 

concerning energy conservation testing, 

labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297) 

DOE may, however, grant waivers of 

Federal preemption for particular State 

laws or regulations, in accordance with 

the procedures and other provisions of 

EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) 

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

the criteria and procedures DOE must 

follow when prescribing or amending 

test procedures for covered products. 

EPCA requires 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 (as determined by the 

Secretary) or period of use and shall not 

be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 

U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) 

With respect to CPSVs, EPCA requires 

DOE to use ASTM International 

(‘‘ASTM’’) F2324 (‘‘ASTM F2324’’) as 

the basis for the test procedure for 

measuring flow rate. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)(14)) 

EPCA also requires that, at least once 

every 7 years, DOE evaluate test 

procedures for each type of covered 

product, including CPSVs, to determine 

whether amended test procedures 

would more accurately or fully comply 

with the requirements for the test 

procedures to not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct and be 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results that reflect energy efficiency, 

energy use, and estimated operating 

costs during a representative average 

use cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)(1)(A)) 

If the Secretary determines, on her 

own behalf or in response to a petition 

by any interested person, that a test 

procedure should be prescribed or 

amended, the Secretary shall promptly 

publish in the Federal Register 

proposed test procedures and afford 

interested persons an opportunity to 

present oral and written data, views, 

and arguments with respect to such 

procedures. The comment period on a 

proposed rule to amend a test procedure 

shall be at least 60 days and may not 

exceed 270 days. In prescribing or 

amending a test procedure, the 

Secretary shall take into account such 

information as the Secretary determines 

relevant to such procedure, including 

technological developments relating to 

energy use or energy efficiency of the 

type (or class) of covered products 

involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)). If DOE 

determines that test procedure revisions 

are not appropriate, DOE must publish 

its determination not to amend the test 

procedures. DOE is publishing this final 

rule in satisfaction of the 7-year review 

requirement specified in EPCA. (42 

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

B. Background 

DOE’s existing test procedures for 

CPSVs appear at 10 CFR 431.264. DOE 

most recently amended the test 

procedure for CPSVs in a final rule 

published December 30, 2015, in which 

DOE incorporated by reference the 2013 

version of ASTM F2324 (‘‘ASTM 

F2324–13’’). 80 FR 81441 (‘‘December 

2015 Final Rule’’). 

On June 5, 2020, DOE published a 

request for information soliciting public 

comment and data on all aspects of the 

existing DOE test procedure for CPSVs. 

85 FR 34541 (‘‘June 2020 RFI’’). DOE 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) for the test 

procedure on May 20, 2021, presenting 

DOE’s proposals to amend the CPSV test 

procedure. 86 FR 27298 (‘‘May 2021 

NOPR’’). DOE held a public meeting 

related to this NOPR on June 9, 2021. 

DOE received comments in response 

to the May 2021 NOPR from the 

interested parties listed in Table I.1. 

TABLE I.1—WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO MAY 2021 NOPR 

Commenter(s) Reference in this final rule Commenter type 

Appliance Standards Awareness Project and Natural Resources Defense 

Council.

ASAP and NRDC .................... Efficiency Organizations. 

Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance .................................................................. NEEA ....................................... Efficiency Organization. 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison, and San 

Diego Gas and Electric Company; collectively, the California InvestorOwned Utilities.

CA IOUs .................................. Utilities. 

Plumbing Manufacturers International ................................................................. PMI .......................................... Trade Organization. 

A parenthetical reference at the end of 

a comment quotation or paraphrase 

provides the location of the item in the 

public record.4

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule 

In this final rule, DOE amends 10 CFR 

431.264, ‘‘Uniform test method for the 

measurement of flow rate for 

commercial prerinse spray valves,’’ as 

follows: 

• Amends the definition of 

‘‘commercial prerinse spray valve’’ to 

codify existing guidance on how to 

apply the definition; and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13903 

• Incorporates by reference the 

current industry standard—ASTM 

F2324–13 (R2019), ‘‘Standard Test 

Method for Prerinse Spray Valves.’’ 

• Explicitly permits voluntary testing 

using a test pressure other than the test 

pressure required for determining 

compliance with the standards at 10 

CFR part 431. 

The adopted amendments are 

summarized in Table II.1, including a 

comparison to the test procedure before 

amendment, as well as the reason for 

the adopted change. 

TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN THE AMENDED TEST PROCEDURE

DOE test procedure prior to 

amendment Amended test procedure Attribution 

A ‘‘commercial prerinse spray 

valve’’ is defined as ‘‘a handheld 

device that has a release-toclose valve and is suitable for removing food residue from food 

service items before cleaning 

them in commercial dishwashing 

or ware washing equipment.’’.

A ‘‘commercial prerinse spray valve’’ is defined as ‘‘a handheld device that has a release-to-close valve and is suitable for removing 

food residue from food service items before cleaning them in commercial dishwashing or ware washing equipment based on any or 

all of the following: 

(1) Equipment design and representations (for example, whether 

equipment is represented as being capable of rinsing dishes as 

compared to equipment that is represented exclusively for washing 

walls and floors or animal washing); 

(2) Channels of marketing and sales (for example, whether equipment is marketed or sold through outlets that market or sell to food 

service entities); 

Codify existing guidance regarding 

scope of definition. 

(3) Actual sales (including whether the end-users are restaurants or 

commercial or institutional kitchens, even if those sales are indirectly through an entity such as a distributor).

References industry standard 

ASTM F2324–13.

References reaffirmed industry standard ASTM F2324–13 (2019) ...... Harmonize with current industry 

standard. 

Requires testing at 60 pounds per 

square inch (‘‘psi’’).

Requires testing at 60 psi and explicitly permits voluntary testing at 

other water pressures.

Response to stakeholder comment. 

DOE has determined that the 

amendments described in section III of 

this document and adopted in this 

document will not alter the measured 

efficiency of CPSVs or require retesting 

or recertification solely as a result of 

DOE’s adoption of the amendments to 

the test procedures. Additionally, DOE 

has determined that the amendments 

will not increase the cost of testing. 

Discussion of DOE’s actions are 

addressed in detail in section III of this 

document. 

The effective date for the amended 

test procedures adopted in this final 

rule is 30 days after publication of this 

document in the Federal Register. 

Representations of energy use or energy 

efficiency must be based on testing in 

accordance with the amended test 

procedures beginning 180 days after the 

publication of this final rule. 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope and Definition 

‘‘Commercial prerinse spray valve’’ is 

defined at 10 CFR 431.262 as ‘‘a 

handheld device that has a release-toclose valve and is suitable for removing 

food residue from food service items 

before cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment.’’ DOE notes that EPCA 

defines ‘‘commercial prerinse spray 

valve’’ as ‘‘a handheld device designed 

and marketed for use with commercial 

dishwashing and ware washing 

equipment that sprays water on dishes, 

flatware, and other food service items 

for the purpose of removing food 

residue before cleaning the items.’’ 42 

U.S.C. 6291(33)(A) In the December 

2015 Final Rule, DOE observed that 

some products were being designed by 

the manufacturer for other specific 

applications but were marketed to rinse 

dishes before washing. 80 FR 81441, 

81443. Accordingly, DOE amended the 

definition of commercial prerinse spray 

valve to provide more explicit direction 

that any spray valve ‘‘suitable’’ for 

prerinsing purposes is subject to energy 

conservation standards in order to 

ensure a level and fair playing field for 

all products serving commercial 

prerinse spray valve applications. 80 FR 

81441, 81443–81444. 

In the preamble of the December 2015 

Final Rule, DOE provided additional 

guidance on the various factors that 

DOE would consider in determining 

whether a spray valve model is 

‘‘suitable’’ for removing food residue 

from food service items before cleaning 

them in commercial dishwashing or 

ware washing equipment. Id. at 80 FR 

81444. Specifically, DOE would 

consider factors including (1) product 

design and descriptions (including how 

the product is identified and described 

in product catalogs, brochures, 

specification sheets, and 

communications with prospective 

purchasers); (2) channels of marketing 

and sales (for example, a product 

marketed or sold through outlets that 

market or sell to food service entities 

such as restaurants or commercial or 

institutional kitchens is more likely to 

be used as a commercial prerinse spray 

valve than one marketed or sold through 

outlets catering to pet care. Similarly, a 

product marketed outside of the United 

States as a commercial prerinse spray 

valve, or for similar use in a kitchentype setting, would be considered 

suitable for use as a commercial 

prerinse spray valve); and (3) actual 

sales (including whether the end-users 

are restaurants or commercial or 

institutional kitchens, even if those 

sales are indirectly through an entity 

such as a distributor, to determine 

whether the spray valve is used 

extensively in conjunction with 

commercial dishwashing and ware 

washing equipment). Id. 

In response to the June 2020 RFI, 

NEEA commented that there were 

valves on the market that appeared to 

meet the definition of commercial 

prerinse spray valve and either had 

marketed flow rates above the energy 

conservation standard and/or were not 

being certified to DOE. (NEEA, No. 6 at 

p. 1) To provide further certainty as to 

the definition of ‘‘commercial prerinse 

spray valve,’’ in the May 2021 NOPR 

DOE proposed to amend the definition 

of ‘‘commercial prerinse spray valve’’ to 

codify the guidance that had been 

provided in the December 2015 Final 

Rule for determining whether 

equipment is suitable for removing food 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
13904 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

residue from food service items before 

cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment. 86 FR 27298, 27301–27302. 

Specifically, DOE proposed to define a 

‘‘commercial prerinse spray valve’’ as a 

handheld device that has a release-toclose valve and is suitable for removing 

food residue from food service items 

before cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment. DOE may determine that a 

device is suitable for removing food 

residue from food service items before 

cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment based on any or all of the 

following: (1) Equipment design and 

representations (for example, whether 

equipment is represented as being 

capable of rinsing dishes as compared to 

equipment that is represented 

exclusively for washing walls and 

floors); (2) Channels of marketing and 

sales (for example, whether equipment 

is marketed or sold through outlets that 

market or sell to food service entities); 

(3) Actual sales.’’ 86 FR 27298, 27302. 

DOE tentatively determined that the 

proposed definition would not change 

the scope of coverage. Id. Rather, the 

proposal would only codify in the CFR 

the existing guidance on how to apply 

the definition. 

ASAP, NRDC and NEEA commented 

that the proposed definition adds clarity 

and reduces the risk of misclassification 

of commercial prerinse spray valves. 

(ASAP and NRDC, No. 10 at p. 1; NEEA, 

No. 12 at pp. 1–2) ASAP and NRDC 

commented that there are many CPSV 

models that appear to meet the current 

definition of a CPSV, yet do not meet 

the efficiency standards that DOE 

previously prescribed. These 

commenters believe that considerable 

water savings are likely being lost due 

to non-compliant products and believe 

that the definition DOE proposed in the 

NOPR encompasses the CPSV models in 

violation and will help close loopholes 

in the current standards. (ASAP and 

NRDC, No. 10 at p. 1; Webinar 

Transcript, No. 9 at p. 14) 

NEEA stated that the first two criteria 

provide clarity that products marketed 

for use as a prerinse valve (no matter 

where they are sold) and valves sold via 

commercial kitchen retailers (even if 

they are marketed as ‘‘utility’’ valves) 

meet the definition of a CPSV and 

therefore must meet the CPSV regulated 

flow rates; and the third criteria clarifies 

that valves sold and installed in CPSV 

applications also meet the criteria of a 

CPSV no matter where they were sold 

or how they were marketed. (NEEA, No. 

12 at p. 2) 

The CA IOUs generally supported the 

proposed definition for CPSVs, stating 

that it is likely to reduce the risk of 

misclassification of higher flow valves 

not intended for food service prerinse 

applications. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at p. 4) 

The CA IOUS also stated that some 

ambiguity could still exist under DOE’s 

proposed definition for certain products 

meant for other applications like 

washing walls. The CA IOUs 

recommended adding that CPSVs are 

‘‘intended to be installed in fixtures 

with a faucet or overhead pull-down 

hose over a multi-compartment sink, 

wash-down trough, or a scrapping 

device.’’ (CA IOUs, No. 11 at p. 5) 

PMI opposed the proposed definition, 

claiming that manufacturers would no 

longer have a clear definition by which 

to produce and sell CPSVs, and would 

instead rely on a subjective set of 

requirements that would be left up to 

the discretion of DOE to apply and 

enforce, leading to confusion. (PMI, No. 

13 at pp. 1–2; Webinar Transcript, No. 

9 at pp. 12–13) PMI commented that 

NEEA’s comment in response to the 

June 2020 RFI demonstrates that use of 

the word ‘‘suitable’’ has led to confusion 

in the market and scrutiny of products 

that were never intended for food 

service applications. Id. PMI asserted 

that manufacturers submitted comment 

during the previous rulemaking 

recommending that DOE define the term 

‘‘suitable’’ in order to ensure only 

products intended to be used as CPSVs 

are regulated as such. Id. PMI 

recommended modifying the current 

definition by replacing the phrase ‘‘is 

suitable for removing’’ with the phrase 

‘‘intended by the manufacturer to 

remove.’’ Id. 

PMI further asserted that 

manufacturers provide clear statements 

on their websites, and within their 

product literature, regarding which 

products are intended to meet DOE’s 

current CPSV regulations. (PMI, No. 13 

at p. 2; Webinar Transcript, No. 9 at p. 

13) PMI provided four examples of 

product literature: (1) A product with a 

represented 1.15 gallon per minute 

(‘‘gpm’’) flow rate marketed as 

‘‘SUITABLE for removing food residue 

from food service items before cleaning 

them in commercial dishwashing or 

ware washing equipment’’; (2) a product 

with a represented 2.45 gpm flow rate 

marketed as ‘‘NOT SUITABLE for 

removing food residue from food service 

items before cleaning them in 

commercial dishwashing or ware 

washing equipment’’; (3) a product with 

a represented 1.07 gpm flow rate 

marketed as ‘‘EPAct/DOE Compliant’’ 

and ‘‘2019 DOE PRSV—Class II 

compliant’’; and (4) a product 

represented with a 5.6 gpm flow rate 

marketed as ‘‘Not Intended for USA PreRinse.’’ Id. 

PMI additionally commented that 

manufacturers will incur additional 

costs if they are required to meet energy 

conservation standards for products not 

intended for removing food residue, 

such as washdown equipment or pet 

grooming equipment. (Id.; Webinar 

Transcript, No. 9 at p. 13) 

Regarding the CA IOUs’ suggestion to 

base the CPSV definition on the 

intended location for installing the 

fixture, intent suggests subjectivity, 

which not only reduces regulatory 

transparency but also creates challenges 

for enforcement. DOE has previously 

rejected such an approach. 80 FR 81441, 

81443. As discussed in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking to the December 

2015 Final Rule, DOE has also observed 

products marketed as ‘‘pull-down 

kitchen faucet’’ or ‘‘commercial style 

prerinse,’’ which generally are handheld 

devices that can be used for commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing regardless 

of intended installation location. 80 FR 

35874, 35876 (Jun. 23, 2015). DOE notes 

that these categories of products 

typically do not have a release-to-close 

valve and therefore generally do not 

meet the definition of commercial 

prerinse spray valve. However, if such 

a product does have a release-to-close 

valve, it would meet the definition of 

commercial prerinse spray valve 

regardless of intended installation 

location, provided it were being sold 

through channels of marketing that sell 

to food service entities. 

In response to comments regarding 

lack of clarity around the term 

‘‘suitable,’’ DOE notes that neither DOE 

nor manufacturers have identified any 

physical characteristics that would 

distinguish valves suitable for removing 

food residue from food service items 

before cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment from other valves. In the 

absence of any physical identifying 

characteristics that could be used to 

distinguish a CPSV, DOE articulated in 

the December 2015 Final Rule the 

means by which DOE would consider a 

spray valve to be ‘‘suitable’’ for 

removing food residue from food service 

items before cleaning them in 

commercial dishwashing or ware 

washing equipment. 80 FR 81441, 

81443–81445 The intent of DOE’s 

proposal in the May 2021 NOPR to 

codify this guidance as part of the CPSV 

definition is to provide manufacturers 

with greater certainty as to how DOE 

would determine whether a particular 

spray valve model is covered by the 

scope of DOE’s CPSV test procedure and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13905 

5The latest version of the industry standard, 

ASTM F2324–13 (R2019), that DOE is incorporating 

by reference in this document also specifies testing 

with a water pressure at 60 ± 2 psi. 

6 Dynamic water pressure refers to the water 

pressure when water is flowing. For the DOE test 

procedure, this is measured upstream of the CPSV. 

In this notice, dynamic water pressure can be 

assumed when referencing water pressure unless 

explicitly stated to be ‘‘static’’ pressure. 

energy conservation standards. As 

stated, the intent is not to amend the 

scope of the definition. 86 FR 27298, 

27302. 

In response to the suggestion by PMI 

that the definition of CPSV reference the 

use of the equipment as intended by the 

manufacturer, DOE notes that the 

definition of CPSV as defined by EPCA 

references how the device is ‘‘designed 

and marketed for use’’ without limiting 

consideration of the marketed use to 

that of the manufacturer. (42 U.S.C. 

6291(33)(A)) As discussed in the 

December 2015 Final Rule, DOE 

observed instances in which products 

designed by the manufacturer for other 

specific applications were marketed on 

retailer websites for commercial 

dishwashing and ware washing. 80 FR 

81441, 81443. This, in part, prompted 

DOE to codify a definition of CPSV that 

replaces the term ‘‘designed and 

marketed for use’’ with the phrase 

‘‘suitable for use.’’ Id. 80 FR 81444. 

DOE’s prior observations of the market 

have demonstrated that statements of 

manufacturer intent may not correspond 

to how such products are marketed by 

third-party distributors, or how such 

products would be used by the 

consumer. DOE research indicates that a 

large majority of CPSVs are sold through 

third-party distributors. Without any 

physical features that would distinguish 

between types of potential end uses, a 

definition that is limited to 

manufacturer intent, as suggested by 

PMI, would ignore the marketing 

practice of third-party distributors that 

likely influences how many of these 

products are used. As noted in the 

preamble of the December 2015 Final 

Rule and May 2021 NOPR, DOE also 

may consider actual sales, including 

whether the end-users are restaurants or 

commercial or institutional kitchens, 

even if those sales are indirectly through 

an entity such as a distributor. 86 FR 

27298, 27301–27302 and 80 FR 81441, 

81444. The amended definition 

explicitly provides, consistent with the 

discussion in the May 2021 NOPR, that 

spray valves with actual sales to 

commercial prerinse applications may 

be considered suitable even if those 

sales are through a third-party 

distributor. 

With regard to the concern expressed 

by PMI that manufacturers would incur 

additional costs if products not 

intended for removing food residue 

(such as washdown equipment or pet 

grooming products) are required to meet 

the CPSV energy conservation 

standards—the revised definition 

proposed by DOE and adopted in this 

final rule does not change the scope of 

the definition. The amendment to the 

definition of CPSV adopted in this final 

rule codifies the guidance DOE has 

previously provided on the factors to 

consider when determining whether a 

valve is suitable for removing food 

residue from food service items before 

cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment. If a spray valve model is not 

represented as being capable of rinsing 

dishes, is not marketed or sold through 

outlets that market or sell to food 

service entities, and is not sold to endusers that are restaurants or commercial 

or institutional kitchens, is not a CPSV. 

A spray valve that a manufacturer 

markets exclusively for wall washing 

and floors (i.e., washdown equipment) 

is an example of a device that would not 

be a CPSV because it is not represented 

as being capable of rinsing dishes and 

therefore would not be considered 

suitable for removing food residue from 

food service items before cleaning them 

in commercial dishwashing or ware 

washing equipment). Similarly, the 

amended definition includes spray 

valves represented exclusively for 

animal washing as an example of valves 

that are not CPSVs. 

For the reasons described in the May 

2021 NOPR and reiterated in this final 

rule, and in consideration of comments 

from interested parties, DOE is 

amending the definition of ‘‘commercial 

prerinse spray valve’’ to mean ‘‘a 

handheld device that has a release-toclose valve and is suitable for removing 

food residue from food service items 

before cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment. DOE may determine that a 

device is suitable for removing food 

residue from food service items before 

cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment based on any or all of the 

following: (1) Equipment design and 

representations (for example, whether 

equipment is represented as being 

capable of rinsing dishes as compared to 

equipment that is represented 

exclusively for washing walls and floors 

or for animal washing); (2) Channels of 

marketing and sales (for example, 

whether equipment is marketed or sold 

through outlets that market or sell to 

food service entities); (3) Actual sales 

(including whether the end-users are 

restaurants or commercial or 

institutional kitchens, even if those 

sales are indirectly through an entity 

such as a distributor).’’ 

B. Updates to Industry Standards 

The CPSV test procedure incorporates 

by reference ASTM F2324–13 at 10 CFR 

431.263. The specific sections of ASTM 

F2324–13 that are specified in the test 

method in 10 CFR 431.264 are the test 

methods for measuring flow rate at 

Sections 6.1 through 6.9 (except 6.4 and 

6.7), 9.1 through 9.4, and 10.1 through 

10.2.5 of ASTM F2324–13. 10 CFR 

431.264(b)(1). The DOE test procedure 

incorporates the corresponding 

calculations in Section 11.3.1 of ASTM 

F2343–13. For the spray force test 

method, the DOE test procedure 

references Sections 6.2, 6.4 through 6.9, 

9.1 through 9.5.3.2, and 10.3.1 through 

10.3.8 of ASTM F2324–13. 10 CFR 

431.264(b)(2). 

In the May 2021 NOPR, DOE 

proposed to update the DOE test 

procedure to reference the reaffirmed 

industry testing standard, ASTM 

F2324–13 (R2019), and tentatively 

determined that such a change would 

not result in any substantive changes to 

the existing CPSV test procedure. 86 FR 

27298, 27302. 

The CA IOUs and PMI both 

commented that they support DOE 

incorporating the reaffirmed industry 

test standard. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at p. 5; 

PMI, No. 13 at p. 2; Webinar Transcript, 

No. 9 at p. 15) PMI commented that 

incorporating the reaffirmed industry 

standard would not lead to any 

additional costs. (PMI, No. 23 at p. 2) 

DOE did not receive any comments 

opposing incorporation of the 

reaffirmed industry standard ASTM 

F2324–13 (2019). For the reasons 

discussed in the May 2021 NOPR, DOE 

is updating the incorporation by 

reference in the CPSV test procedure to 

reference the reaffirmed industry 

standard, ASTM F2324–13 (R2019). 

C. Water Pressure 

ASTM F2324–13 specifies testing 

CPSVs at a water pressure of 60 ± 2 

pounds per square inch (‘‘psi’’).5

In the May 2021 NOPR, DOE stated 

that it did not receive any data 

suggesting that a different test pressure 

would be more representative and noted 

that the DOE test pressure aligns with 

the industry-consensus standard. 86 FR 

27298, 27302–27303. Therefore, DOE 

proposed maintaining testing with a 

dynamic water pressure 6 of 60 ± 2 psi. 

DOE received several comments 

suggesting a different water pressure 

may be appropriate and one suggesting 

an additional labeling requirement. 

NEEA encouraged DOE to review 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
13906 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

7Static water pressure refers to the water pressure 

when water is not flowing. 

8The water pressure sensitivity analysis is 

available at www.regulations.gov under docket 

number EERE–2014–BT–TP–0055. 

available data to ensure that 60 psi is 

not higher than the average water 

pressure. (NEEA, No. 12 at p. 3) The CA 

IOUs commented that its investigation 

of four field studies indicates an average 

dynamic water pressure of 52 psi, and 

that their analysis of these field studies 

indicates that more than one third of the 

sites with CPSVs with flow rates of 1.28 

gpm had pressures less than 50 psi, 

while only 16 percent had flow 

pressures over 60 psi. (CA IOUs, No. 11 

at pp. 2–3) The CA IOUs further 

commented that model plumbing codes 

adopted by most states limit the 

maximum static pressure 7 at the meter 

at 80 psi. The CA IOUs estimated that 

this would result in a dynamic pressure 

of around 66 psi. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at 

p. 3) The CA IOUs further commented 

that several cities require a minimum 

static pressure of 30 psi, which the CA 

IOUs estimate would result in a 

minimum dynamic pressure of 25 psi. 

Id. Based on these estimates of the 

maximum and minimum expected 

water pressures, the CA IOUs suggested, 

at least for Class 1 products, that testing 

CPSVs at 40 psi would provide a good 

indication of water use at the low end 

of pressures. (CA IOUs, No. 11 at pp. 3– 

4) The CA IOUs commented that 

although 50 psi would be more 

representative of an average pressure in 

commercial kitchens, given that current 

standards are based on testing at 60 psi, 

an additional test at 40 psi should be 

added to represent the lower end of 

pressures experienced in commercial 

kitchens. Id. at p. 4 The CA IOUs 

asserted that an additional test at 40 psi 

would not be unduly burdensome for 

manufacturers to conduct. Id. Finally, 

the CA IOUs recommended that DOE 

consider requiring a label on CPSVs 

denoting the tested flow rate at 40 psi 

in addition to labeling with the tested 

flow rate at 60 psi, to enable consumers 

to purchase products best suited for 

their operational needs and building 

constraints, while maximizing energy 

and water savings. Id. 

NEEA commented that low water 

pressure is an important consideration 

when installing a CPSV, as dissatisfied 

CPSV users are known to replace lowflow valves with higher flow valves in 

order to achieve the performance they 

need. (NEEA, No. 12 at pp. 2–3) NEEA 

stated that with the current test pressure 

of 60 psi, consumers with lower water 

pressure do not have the information 

they need to know if a valve will 

perform as they need it to before 

purchasing and installing it. Id. at p. 3 

NEEA recommended that DOE adopt an 

optional informational test pressure of 

40 psi that would provide a consistent 

point of comparison for products 

looking to highlight and differentiate 

performance at lower pressures and 

would provide a foundation for 

voluntary labeling programs at the state 

or national level. Id. 

As an accompaniment to the 

December 2015 Final Rule, DOE 

provided a separate report titled 

‘‘Analysis of Water Pressure for Testing 

Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves Final 

Report,’’ 8 in which DOE collected data 

from studies that reported pressures and 

flow rates for typical CPSV applications 

to determine the representative water 

pressure for testing commercial prerinse 

spray valves. The report concluded that 

the flow rate of CPSVs can vary by 

almost 40 percent when the water 

pressure changes from 40 psi to 80 psi. 

Based on the data, the weighted average 

dynamic water pressure was estimated 

to be around 55 psi, which resulted in 

a 4-percent decrease in flow rate as 

compared to the flow rate of a CPSV 

installed with a water pressure of 60 psi. 

(Docket No. EERE–2014–BT–TP–0055– 

0008 at p. 4–5) Thus, the weighted 

average pressure of the available data is 

sufficiently similar to the prescribed test 

pressure in the industry test procedure. 

Accordingly, DOE determined that 60 

psi is sufficiently representative of the 

water pressures CPSVs will experience 

in the field. 80 FR 81441, 81447. 

In the December 2015 Final Rule, 

DOE acknowledged that water pressure 

will affect the flow rate of a CPSV once 

installed. 80 FR 81441, 81446. 

Typically, lower pressures result in 

lower flow rates and higher pressures 

result in higher flow rates. Nevertheless, 

DOE noted that testing at a single 

specific water pressure to demonstrate 

compliance with the maximum 

allowable flow rate would create a 

consistent and standardized reference 

that would be comparable across all 

models Id. DOE also noted that 

requiring testing at multiple water 

pressures would increase the test 

burden. Id. Additionally, a review of 

industry testing standards indicated that 

testing at lower water pressures was 

typically for the purpose of determining 

a minimum flow rate. Id. 

As discussed, the requirement in 10 

CFR 431.264 to test at 60 ± 2 psi is based 

on ASTM F2324, which is an industry 

consensus standard that includes input 

from a wide variety of national 

stakeholders and was corroborated with 

the data compiled for the December 

2015 Final Rule. The data cited by the 

CA IOUs are largely consistent with the 

data previously presented by DOE in 

support of the December 2015 Final 

Rule. DOE has not received any new 

data indicating that an alternative test 

pressure would be more representative. 

Because the weighted average pressure 

of the available data is sufficiently 

similar to the prescribed test pressure in 

the industry test procedure, DOE 

reaffirms its prior conclusion that a 60- 

psi test pressure is sufficiently 

representative of the water pressures 

CPSVs will experience in the field. 

Moreover, testing at a single test 

pressure is appropriate for measuring 

flowrate for determination of 

compliance with the maximum flow 

rate applicable under the energy 

conservation standards. Based on the 

reasons discussed in this section, DOE 

has decided to maintain the current test 

pressure of 60 ±2 psi. 

With regard to the suggestions to add 

a second test at a test pressure of 40 psi, 

DOE recognizes that some consumers 

may value representations of flow rate 

corresponding to other water pressures 

than 60 psi. DOE has determined, 

however, that requiring all 

manufacturers to perform an additional 

test at a pressure of 40 psi, for 

mandatory energy conservation 

standards and/or a mandatory labeling 

requirement as suggested by the CA 

IOUs, would be unduly burdensome, 

because this would require 

manufacturers to retest and recertify all 

CPSVs and the current test pressure is 

representative of average use. However, 

based on the comments received from 

NEEA and the CA IOUs in response to 

DOE’s request for data regarding water 

pressure, DOE recognizes that 

representations of flow rate at pressures 

other than 60 psi may provide useful 

information to consumers at the lower 

end of the water pressure range. 

Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is 

explicitly providing for optional testing 

at test pressures other than the required 

60 ± 2 psi. Specifically, DOE is 

establishing a new paragraph (d) of 10 

CFR 431.264, which provides that 

manufacturers may voluntarily test 

pursuant to the DOE test procedure 

using other test pressures in addition to 

the 60 psi test pressure required for 

determining compliance with the 

standards at 10 CFR part 431. When 

making voluntary representations, 

manufacturers must represent flow rate 

at alternative water pressures in 

accordance with the sampling plan at 10 

CFR 429.51(a); however, manufacturers 

are not required to submit certification 

reports for voluntary representations. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13907 

9The size standards are listed by NAICS code and 

industry description and are available at: 

www.sba.gov/document/support—table-sizestandards (Last accessed on December 1, 2021). 

10Certified equipment in the CCD are listed by 

product class and can be accessed at 

www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/ 

#q=Product_Group_s%3A* (Last accessed 

December 1, 2021). 

D. Test Procedure Costs 

In this final rule, DOE amends the test 

procedures for CPSVs to amend the 

definition of CPSV to clarify the current 

scope, incorporate by reference the 

reaffirmed industry standard, ASTM 

F2324–13 (R2019), and explicitly permit 

voluntary testing at alternative water 

pressures. 

As discussed, the amendment to the 

definition of ‘‘commercial prerinse 

spray valve’’ codifies DOE guidance on 

factors for determining whether a spray 

value is suitable for removing food 

residue from food service items before 

cleaning them in commercial 

dishwashing or ware washing 

equipment. The amendment does not 

change the scope of the definition or the 

scope of the test procedure and energy 

conservation standards. 

DOE has determined that the 

reaffirmed industry standard, ASTM 

F2324–13 (R2019), is not substantively 

different from the prior version 

referenced by the DOE test procedure. 

As such, reference to ASTM F2324–13 

(R2019) will not change how the testing 

CPSVs is conducted and would not 

impact the measured values of water use 

or spray force used to determine 

compliance with standards. Regarding 

voluntary representations, the 

provisions providing for testing at 

additional water pressures are optional 

only. 

Accordingly, DOE has determined 

that these adopted amendments will not 

be unduly burdensome for 

manufacturers to conduct. Further, DOE 

has determined that the adopted test 

procedure amendments will not impact 

testing costs already experienced by 

manufacturers. 

E. Effective and Compliance Dates 

The effective date for the adopted test 

procedure amendment will be 30 days 

after publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. EPCA prescribes that 

all representations of energy efficiency 

and energy use, including those made 

on marketing materials and product 

labels, must be made in accordance with 

an amended test procedure, beginning 

180 days after publication of the final 

rule in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(c)(2)) EPCA provides an allowance 

for individual manufacturers to petition 

DOE for an extension of the 180-day 

period if the manufacturer may 

experience undue hardship in meeting 

the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) To 

receive such an extension, petitions 

must be filed with DOE no later than 60 

days before the end of the 180-day 

period and must detail how the 

manufacturer will experience undue 

hardship. Id. 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) has determined this test 

procedure rulemaking does not 

constitute ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 

4, 1993). Accordingly, this action was 

not subject to review under the 

Executive order by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(‘‘OIRA’’) in OMB. 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

of a final regulatory flexibility analysis 

(FRFA) for any final rule where the 

agency was first required by law to 

publish a proposed rule for public 

comment, unless the agency certifies 

that the rule, if promulgated, will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

As required by Executive Order 13272, 

‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities 

in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(August 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003 to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the DOE 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE 

has made its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of the General 

Counsel’s website: energy.gov/gc/officegeneral-counsel. 

As stated, the amendments adopted in 

this final rule revise the definition of 

CPSVs without modifying the scope and 

update references to the reaffirmed 

industry standard, which made no 

substantive changes to the test 

procedure. DOE has determined that the 

adopted test procedure amendments 

would not impact testing costs already 

experienced by manufacturers. 

The amendments adopted in this final 

rule would do not have significant 

economic impact on small businesses. 

The Small Business Administration 

(‘‘SBA’’) considers a business entity to 

be a small business, if, together with its 

affiliates, it employs less than a 

threshold number of workers or earns 

less than the average annual receipts 

specified in 13 CFR part 121. The 

threshold values set forth in these 

regulations use size standards and codes 

established by the North American 

Industry Classification System 

(‘‘NAICS’’).9

The NAICS code for commercial 

prerinse spray valve manufacturing is 

covered under NAICS code 332919, 

other metal valve and pipe fitting 

manufacturing. The SBA employee 

threshold for small businesses for 

NAICS code 332919 is 750 employees or 

less. 

DOE collected data from DOE’s 

compliance certification database to 

identify manufacturers of commercial 

prerinse spray valves.10 DOE identified 

13 companies that sell commercial 

prerinse spray valves covered by this 

rulemaking. To identify if these 

companies were small manufacturers, 

DOE used markets research tools (e.g., 

D&B Hoovers, Glassdoor, LinkedIn) to 

estimate employment and determine 

whether companies met the SBA’s 

definition of a small business. Two of 

these companies are large businesses 

with more than 750 total employees. 

Therefore, DOE determined that there 

are 11 companies that meet SBA’s 

definition of a small business. 

In summary, DOE concludes that the 

cost effects accruing from this final rule 

would not have a ‘‘significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities,’’ and that the preparation of a 

FRFA is not warranted. DOE has 

submitted a certification and supporting 

statement of factual basis to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration for review 

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

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

Manufacturers of CPSVs must certify 

to DOE that their products comply with 

any applicable energy conservation 

standards. To certify compliance, 

manufacturers must first obtain test data 

for their products according to the DOE 

test procedures, including any 

amendments adopted for those test 

procedures. DOE has established 

regulations for the certification and 

recordkeeping requirements for all 

covered consumer products and 

commercial equipment, including 

CPSVs (See generally 10 CFR part 429.) 

The collection-of-information 

requirement for the certification and 

recordkeeping is subject to review and 

approval by OMB under the Paperwork 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
13908 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement 

has been approved by OMB under OMB 

control number 1910–1400. Public 

reporting burden for the certification is 

estimated to average 35 hours per 

response, including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this final rule, DOE establishes test 

procedure amendments that it expects 

will be used to develop and implement 

future energy conservation standards for 

CPSVs. 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, DOE has determined that 

adopting test procedures for measuring 

energy efficiency of consumer products 

and industrial equipment is consistent 

with activities identified in 10 CFR part 

1021, appendix A to subpart D, A5 and 

A6. Accordingly, neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), imposes 

certain requirements on agencies 

formulating and implementing policies 

or regulations that preempt State law or 

that have federalism implications. The 

Executive order requires agencies to 

examine the constitutional and statutory 

authority supporting any action that 

would limit the policymaking discretion 

of the States and to carefully assess the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive order also requires agencies to 

have an accountable process to ensure 

meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 

published a statement of policy 

describing the intergovernmental 

consultation process it will follow in the 

development of such regulations. 65 FR 

13735. DOE examined this final rule 

and determined that it will 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 this 

final rule. States can petition DOE for 

exemption from such preemption to the 

extent, and based on criteria, set forth in 

EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further 

action is required by Executive Order 

13132. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

Regarding the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), 

imposes on Federal agencies the general 

duty to adhere to the following 

requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity; (2) write 

regulations to minimize litigation; (3) 

provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct rather than a general 

standard; and (4) promote simplification 

and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation (1) clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 

specifies any effect on existing Federal 

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct 

while promoting simplification and 

burden reduction; (4) specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 

12988 requires Executive agencies to 

review regulations in light of applicable 

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

determine whether they are met or it is 

unreasonable to meet one or more of 

them. DOE has completed the required 

review and determined that, to the 

extent permitted by law, this final rule 

meets the relevant standards of 

Executive Order 12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘UMRA’’) requires 

each Federal agency to assess the effects 

of Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments and the 

private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 

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

regulatory action resulting in a rule that 

may cause the expenditure by State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100 million or more in any one year 

(adjusted annually for inflation), section 

202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency 

to publish a written statement that 

estimates the resulting costs, benefits, 

and other effects on the national 

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

UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 

develop an effective process to permit 

timely input by elected officers of State, 

local, and Tribal governments on a 

proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental 

mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan 

for giving notice and opportunity for 

timely input to potentially affected 

small governments before establishing 

any requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE 

published a statement of policy on its 

process for intergovernmental 

consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 

12820; also available at energy.gov/gc/ 

office-general-counsel. DOE examined 

this final rule according to UMRA and 

its statement of policy and determined 

that the rule contains neither an 

intergovernmental mandate, nor a 

mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year, so these requirements do not 

apply. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

final rule will not have any impact on 

the autonomy or integrity of the family 

as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 

concluded that it is not necessary to 

prepare a Family Policymaking 

Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

DOE has determined, under Executive 

Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 

(March 18, 1988), that this regulation 

will not result in any takings that might 

require compensation under the Fifth 

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

J. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

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

for agencies to review most 

disseminations of information to the 

public under guidelines established by 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13909 

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). Pursuant to OMB 

Memorandum M–19–15, Improving 

Implementation of the Information 

Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE 

published updated guidelines which are 

available at www.energy.gov/sites/prod/ 

files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20

Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20

Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has reviewed 

this final rule under the OMB and DOE 

guidelines and has concluded that it is 

consistent with applicable policies in 

those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to OMB, a 

Statement of Energy Effects for any 

significant energy action. A ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ is defined as any action 

by an agency that promulgated or is 

expected to lead to promulgation of a 

final rule, and that (1) is a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866, or any successor order; and (2) 

is likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy; or (3) is designated by the 

Administrator of OIRA as a significant 

energy action. For any significant energy 

action, the agency must give a detailed 

statement of any adverse effects on 

energy supply, distribution, or use if the 

regulation is implemented, and of 

reasonable alternatives to the action and 

their expected benefits on energy 

supply, distribution, and use. 

This regulatory action is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it 

would not have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, nor has it been designated as 

a significant energy action by the 

Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is 

not a significant energy action, and, 

accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 

Statement of Energy Effects. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the Department 

of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 

91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), 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. (15 U.S.C. 

788; ‘‘FEAA’’) Section 32 essentially 

provides in relevant part that, where a 

proposed rule authorizes or requires use 

of commercial standards, the notice of 

proposed rulemaking must inform the 

public of the use and background of 

such standards. In addition, section 

32(c) requires DOE to consult with the 

Attorney General and the Chairman of 

the Federal Trade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) 

concerning the impact of the 

commercial or industry standards on 

competition. 

The amendments to the test procedure 

for CPSVs adopted in this final rule 

incorporates testing methods contained 

in certain sections of the following 

commercial standard: ASTM F2324–13 

(R2019). 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 has consulted with both the 

Attorney General and the Chairman of 

the FTC about the impact on 

competition of using the methods 

contained in these standards and has 

received no comments objecting to their 

use. 

M. Congressional Notification 

As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will 

report to Congress on the promulgation 

of this rule before its effective date. The 

report will state that it has been 

determined that the rule is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

N. Description of Materials Incorporated 

by Reference 

In this final rule, DOE incorporates by 

reference the test standard published by 

ASTM, titled ‘‘Standard Test Method for 

Prerinse Spray Valves,’’ ASTM Standard 

F2324–13 (R2019). ASTM F2324–13 

(R2019) is an industry-accepted test 

procedure that measures water flow rate 

and spray force for CPSVs and is 

applicable to product sold in North 

America. Specifically, the test 

procedure codified by this final rule 

references various sections of ASTM 

F2324–13 (R2019) that address test setup, instrumentation, test conduct, and 

calculations. 

Copies of ASTM F2324–13 (R2019) 

can be obtained from ASTM 

International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO 

Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 

19428–2959, (610) 832–9585 or by going 

to www.astm.org. 

V. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this final rule. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation test 

procedures, Incorporation by reference, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on March 6, 2022, by 

Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

pursuant to delegated authority from the 

Secretary of Energy. That document 

with the original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on March 8, 

2022. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE amends part 431 of 

Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal 

Regulations as set forth below: 

PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 

PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 431 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 2. Section 431.262 is amended by 

revising the definition for ‘‘Commercial 

prerinse spray valve’’ to read as follows: 

§ 431.262 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Commercial prerinse spray valve 

means a handheld device that has a 

release-to-close valve and is suitable for 

removing food residue from food service 

items before cleaning them in 

commercial dishwashing or ware 

washing equipment. DOE may 

determine that a device is suitable for 

removing food residue from food service 

items before cleaning them in 

commercial dishwashing or ware 

washing equipment based on any or all 

of the following: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
13910 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 48 / Friday, March 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

(1) Equipment design and 

representations (for example, whether 

equipment is represented as being 

capable of rinsing dishes as compared to 

equipment that is represented 

exclusively for washing walls and floors 

or animal washing); 

(2) Channels of marketing and sales 

(for example, whether equipment is 

marketed or sold through outlets that 

market or sell to food service entities); 

(3) Actual sales (including whether 

the end-users are restaurants or 

commercial or institutional kitchens, 

even if those sales are indirectly through 

an entity such as a distributor). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 431.263 is transferred from 

under the undesignated center heading 

‘‘Test Procedures’’ to immediately 

following § 431.262 and revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 431.263 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

(a) Certain material is incorporated by 

reference into this subpart with the 

approval of the Director of the Federal 

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce 

any edition other than that specified in 

this section, the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) must publish a document 

in the Federal Register and the material 

must be available to the public. All 

approved material is available for 

inspection at the DOE and at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). Contact DOE 

at: The U.S. Department of Energy, 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, 6th Floor, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 

20024, (202) 586–9127, or Buildings@

ee.doe.gov, https://www.energy.gov/ 

eere/buildings/building-technologiesoffice. For information on the 

availability of this material at NARA, 

email: fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html. The material may be 

obtained from the source(s) in the 

following paragraph(s) of this section. 

(b) ASTM. ASTM, International, 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, (610) 

832–9585, or go to www.astm.org. 

(1) ASTM F2324–13 (R2019) (‘‘ASTM 

F2324’’),’’Standard Test Method for 

Prerinse Spray Valves’’, Approved May 

1, 2019; IBR approved for § 431.264. 

(2) [Reserved] 

■ 4. Section 431.264 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) and adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 431.264 Uniform test method to measure 

flow rate and spray force of commercial 

prerinse spray valves. 

* * * * * 

(b) Testing and calculations for a unit 

with a single spray setting—(1) Flow 

rate. (i) Test each unit in accordance 

with the requirements of Sections 6.1 

through 6.9 (Apparatus) (except 6.4 and 

6.7), 9.1 through 9.4 (Preparation of 

Apparatus), and 10.1 through 10.2.5 

(Procedure) of ASTM F2324, 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.263). Precatory language in ASTM 

F2324 is to be treated as mandatory for 

the purpose of testing. In Section 9.1 of 

ASTM F2324, the second instance of 

‘‘prerinse spray valve’’ refers to the 

spring-style deck-mounted prerinse unit 

defined in Section 6.8. In lieu of using 

manufacturer installation instructions or 

packaging, always connect the 

commercial prerinse spray valve to the 

flex tubing for testing. Normalize the 

weight of the water to calculate flow 

rate using Equation 1 to this paragraph, 

where Wwater is the weight normalized to 

a 1 minute time period, W1 is the weight 

of the water in the carboy at the 

conclusion of the flow rate test, and t1

is the total recorded time of the flow 

rate test. 

(ii) Perform calculations in 

accordance with Section 11.3.1 

(Calculation and Report) of ASTM 

F2324. Record the water temperature 

(°F) and dynamic water pressure (psi) 

once at the start for each run of the test. 

Record the time (min), the normalized 

weight of water in the carboy (lb) and 

the resulting flow rate (gpm) once at the 

end of each run of the test. Record flow 

rate measurements of time (min) and 

weight (lb) at the resolutions of the test 

instrumentation. Perform three runs on 

each unit, as specified in Section 10.2.5 

of ASTM F2324, but disregard any 

references to Annex A1. Then, for each 

unit, calculate the mean of the three 

flow rate values determined from each 

run. Round the final value for flow rate 

to two decimal places and record that 

value. 

(2) Spray force. Test each unit in 

accordance with the test requirements 

specified in Sections 6.2 and 6.4 

through 6.9 (Apparatus), 9.1 through 

9.5.3.2 (Preparation of Apparatus), and 

10.3.1 through 10.3.8 (Procedure) of 

ASTM F2324. In Section 9.1 of ASTM 

F2324, the second instance of ‘‘prerinse 

spray valve’’ refers to the spring-style 

deck-mounted prerinse unit defined in 

Section 6.8. In lieu of using 

manufacturer installation instructions or 

packaging, always connect the 

commercial prerinse spray valve to the 

flex tubing for testing. Record the water 

temperature (°F) and dynamic water 

pressure (psi) once at the start for each 

run of the test. In order to calculate the 

mean spray force value for the unit 

under test, there are two measurements 

per run and there are three runs per test. 

For each run of the test, record a 

minimum of two spray force 

measurements and calculate the mean of 

the measurements over the 15-second 

time period of stabilized flow during 

spray force testing. Record the time 

(min) once at the end of each run of the 

test. Record spray force measurements 

at the resolution of the test 

instrumentation. Conduct three runs on 

each unit, as specified in Section 10.3.8 

of ASTM F2324, but disregard any 

references to Annex A1. Ensure the unit 

has been stabilized separately during 

each run. Then for each unit, calculate 

and record the mean of the spray force 

values determined from each run. 

Round the final value for spray force to 

one decimal place. 

* * * * * 

(d) Test procedure for voluntary 

representations. Follow paragraph (b)(1) 

or (2) or (c) of this section, as applicable, 

using test water pressure(s) of interest 

for voluntary representations of flow 

rate. Representations made at a water 

pressure other than the required test 

water pressure cannot replace a 

representation at the required test water 

pressure specified in Section 9.1 of 

ASTM F2324. Any voluntary 

representation of flow rate made 

pursuant to this paragraph shall specify 

the water pressure associated with the 

represented flow rate. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05230 Filed 3–10–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1ER11MR22.000</GPH>

(Eq. 1 to paragraph (b)(l)(i))