```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 11 (Friday, January 17, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5519-5538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00986]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009]
RIN 1904-AF68

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Residential and 
Commercial Clothes Washers and Consumer Clothes Dryers

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this final rule, the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is 
amending the test procedures for residential and commercial clothes 
washers and consumer clothes dryers to update the test cloth 
specifications. DOE is also reorganizing the test procedures for 
improved readability. DOE is conducting this rulemaking to address 
specific issues and to make minor corrections to the current test 
procedures. This rulemaking does not satisfy the statutory requirement 
that, at least once every 7 years, DOE review the test procedures for 
clothes washers and consumer clothes dryers.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is February 18, 2025. The 
amendments will be mandatory for product testing starting July 16, 
2025. The incorporation by reference of certain material listed in the 
rule was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 1, 
2022.

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, 
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for 
review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed 
in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in 
the index may be publicly available, such as those containing 
information that is exempt from public disclosure.
    A link to the docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009. The docket web page contains instructions 
on how

[[Page 5520]]

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: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Dr. Carl Shapiro, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 287-5649. Email: [email protected].
    Mr. Uchechukwu ``Emeka'' Eze, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of 
the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4798. Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
    C. Deviation From Process Rule
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
    A. Scope of Applicability
    B. Relevant Historical Background
    C. Test Cloth Specifications and Requirements
    1. Cut Orientation
    2. Fabric Weight and Thread Count
    3. Granite Weave
    4. Alternate Test Cloth
    5. Uniformity Criteria
    6. Variance P-Value Threshold and Root-Mean-Square Error
    D. Other Clarifying and Restructuring Edits
    1. Introductory Paragraph
    2. Pre-Conditioning Instructions
    3. Harmonizing Clothes Washer and Clothes Dryer Test Procedures
    4. Restructuring Appendix J3
    E. Test Procedure Costs
    F. Effective and Compliance Dates
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
    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. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
    N. Congressional Notification
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

    Consumer (residential) clothes washers (``RCWs''), commercial 
clothes washers (``CCWs''), and consumer clothes dryers are included in 
the list of ``covered products/equipment'' for which DOE is authorized 
to establish and amend energy conservation standards and test 
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(7)-(8); 42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(H)) DOE's test 
procedures for RCWs are currently prescribed in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (``CFR'') at 10 CFR 430.23(j) and at 10 CFR part 430, 
subpart B, appendices J (``appendix J'') and J2 (``appendix J2''). The 
test procedures for CCWs must be the same as those established for 
RCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(8)) DOE's test procedures for consumer clothes 
dryers are currently prescribed at 10 CFR 430.23(d) and at 10 CFR part 
430, subpart B, appendices D1 (``appendix D1'') and D2 (``appendix 
D2''). DOE also prescribes specifications for the test cloth to be used 
for testing clothes washers at appendix J3 to subpart B (``appendix 
J3''). The following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish and 
amend test procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers and 
relevant background information regarding DOE's consideration of test 
procedures for these products.

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, as 
amended (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency 
of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 
U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) Title III, Part B of EPCA \2\ 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other 
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to 
improve energy efficiency. These products include RCWs and consumer 
clothes dryers. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(7)-(8)) Title III, Part C of 
EPCA,\3\ added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, section 441(a), 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial 
Equipment which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve 
energy efficiency. This equipment includes CCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(H)) 
RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers are the subject of this 
document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All 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), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact 
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
    \3\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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; 42 
U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293; 42 U.S.C. 6314), 
labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294; 42 U.S.C. 6315), energy 
conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295; 42 U.S.C. 6313), and the 
authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 
U.S.C. 6296; 42 U.S.C. 6316).
    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that 
manufacturers of covered products/equipment 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); 42 
U.S.C. 6316(a)), and (2) making other representations about the 
efficiency of those products/equipment (42 U.S.C. 6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 
6314(d)). 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); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)).
    Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products and 
equipment established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and 
regulations concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and 
standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297; 42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b)) 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); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)).
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6293 and 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the 
criteria and procedures DOE must follow when prescribing or amending 
test procedures for covered products/equipment. 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); 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)).

[[Page 5521]]

    EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate 
test procedures for each type of covered product and equipment, 
including RCWs, CCWs and consumer clothes dryers, 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); 6314(a)(1)).
    If the Secretary determines, on his or 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)).\4\ If 
DOE determines that test procedure revisions are not appropriate, DOE 
must publish its determination not to amend the test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For commercial equipment, if the Secretary determines that a 
test procedure amendment is warranted, the Secretary must publish 
proposed test procedures in the Federal Register, and afford 
interested persons an opportunity (of not less than 45 days' 
duration) to present oral and written data, views, and arguments on 
the proposed test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, EPCA requires that DOE amend its test procedures for 
all covered products to integrate measures of standby mode and off mode 
energy consumption into the overall energy efficiency, energy 
consumption, or other energy descriptor, unless the current test 
procedure already incorporates the standby mode and off mode energy 
consumption, or if such integration is technically infeasible. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(i)-(ii)) \5\ If an integrated test procedure is 
technically infeasible, DOE must prescribe separate standby mode and 
off mode energy use test procedures for the covered product, if a 
separate test is technically feasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(ii)) 
Any such amendment must consider the most current versions of the 
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62301 \6\ and 
IEC Standard 62087 \7\ as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPCA does not contain an analogous provision for commercial 
equipment.
    \6\ IEC 62301, Household electrical appliances--Measurement of 
standby power (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
    \7\ IEC 62087, Audio, video and related equipment--Methods of 
measurement for power consumption (Edition 1.0, Parts 1-6: 2015, 
Part 7: 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPCA requires the test procedures for CCWs to be the same as the 
test procedures established for RCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(8)) As with 
the test procedures for RCWs, EPCA requires that DOE evaluate, at least 
once every 7 years, the test procedures for CCWs 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. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)).
    DOE is publishing this final rule to address specific issues and to 
make minor corrections to the current test procedures that are required 
for certification of compliance with applicable energy conservation 
standards. As DOE has not conducted a comprehensive review of the 
current test procedures, this rulemaking does not satisfy the EPCA 
requirement that, at least once every 7 years, DOE review the test 
procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(1)(A); 6314(a)(1)(A)).

B. Background

    As discussed, DOE's existing test procedures for clothes washers 
are prescribed at appendix J and appendix J2,\8\ and DOE's existing 
test procedures for consumer clothes dryers are prescribed at appendix 
D1 and appendix D2.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Manufacturers must use the results of testing under appendix 
J2 to determine compliance with the current relevant standards for 
RCWs at 10 CFR 430.32(g)(1) and for CCWs at 10 CFR 431.156(b). 
Manufacturers must use the results of testing under appendix J to 
determine compliance with the relevant standards for RCWs 
manufactured on or after March 1, 2028, specified at 10 CFR 
430.32(g)(2) and with any amended standards for CCWs provided in 10 
CFR 431.156 that are published after January 1, 2022.
    \9\ The test procedures in appendix D1 or appendix D2 must be 
used to determine compliance with the current relevant standards for 
consumer clothes dryers at 10 CFR 430.32(h)(3). Manufacturers must 
use the test procedure in appendix D2 to determine compliance with 
the relevant standards for consumer clothes dryers manufactured on 
or after March 1, 2028, specified at 10 CFR 430.32(h)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, DOE's existing test procedure at appendix J3 provides 
specifications for the test cloth to be used for testing clothes 
washers; procedures for pre-conditioning new test cloth; procedures for 
verifying that new lots \10\ of test cloth meet the defined material 
specifications; and procedures for developing a set of correction 
coefficients that correlate the measured remaining moisture content 
(``RMC'') values of each new test cloth lot with a set of standard RMC 
values established as a historical reference point. These correction 
coefficients are applied to the RMC measurements performed during 
testing according to appendix J or appendix J2, ensuring consistency in 
the final corrected RMC measurement across different test cloth lots 
used for testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The term ``lot'' refers to a quantity of cloth that has 
been manufactured with the same batches of cotton and polyester 
during one continuous process. Section 2 of appendix J3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the test cloth specifications and qualification procedures 
in appendix J3 are nominally applicable to clothes washer testing, DOE 
understands that manufacturers and test laboratories use the same test 
cloth for testing clothes dryers as well. As discussed further in 
section III.B of this document, the test cloth specifications for 
clothes washer testing and clothes dryer testing have historically been 
aligned. Furthermore, as discussed further in section III.D.3 of this 
document, test cloth that satisfies the requirements of appendix J3 for 
clothes washer testing also satisfies the requirements codified in 
appendices D1 and D2 for clothes dryer testing.
    The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (``AHAM'') has 
established a Test Cloth Task Force (``AHAM task force'') that, among 
other responsibilities, reviews and recommends new lots of test cloth 
for industry use; identifies and secures suppliers for manufacturing 
test cloth; conducts research and investigations to recommend 
continuous improvements to the test cloth specifications and 
qualification procedures; and addresses any industry-wide concerns that 
may arise regarding the test cloth. DOE representatives participate in 
the AHAM task force.
    On May 31, 2024, DOE received a letter from AHAM (``May 2024 AHAM 
Letter'') urging DOE to allow the use of alternate test cloth material 
for clothes washer and clothes dryer testing.\11\ The May 2024 AHAM 
Letter also made further requests for DOE to amend certain test cloth 
specifications based on

[[Page 5522]]

the results of recent investigations by the AHAM task force. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Document available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') on 
November 5, 2024 (``November 2024 NOPR''), presenting DOE's proposals 
to amend the test procedures for residential and commercial clothes 
washers and consumer clothes dryers to update the test cloth 
specifications. 89 FR 87803.
    DOE received comments in response to the November 2024 NOPR from 
the interested parties listed in Table I.1.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Table I.1 excludes one comment not applicable to this 
rulemaking.

          Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the November 2024 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Reference in this final   Comment No. in
              Commenter(s)                           rule               the docket          Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Ravnitzky.......................  Ravnitzky.................               5  Individual.
Anonymous...............................  Anonymous.................               6  Individual.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance....  NEEA......................               8  Advocacy Organization.
Association of Home Appliance             AHAM......................              10  Trade Organization.
 Manufacturers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ravnitzky, NEEA, and AHAM submitted comments generally supportive 
of DOE's proposals in the November 2024 NOPR. (Ravnitzky, No. 5 at p. 
1; NEEA, No. 8 at pp. 1-2; AHAM, No. 10 at p. 1) An anonymous commenter 
expressed support for test cloth specifications in order to achieve 
results that identify the most efficient clothes washers. (Anonymous, 
No 6 at p. 1) Comments from these stakeholders regarding specific 
topics addressed in the November 2024 NOPR are discussed in the 
relevant sections of this document.
    A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or 
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop 
test procedures for insert product. (Docket No. EERE-2024-BT-TP-
0009, which is maintained at: www.regulations.gov). The references 
are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number 
at page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Deviation From Process Rule

    In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 
appendix A (``Process Rule''), DOE noted in the November 2024 NOPR that 
it was deviating from section 8(b)(2) of the Process Rule, which states 
that there will be not less than 60 days for public comment on the 
NOPR, with at least one public hearing or workshop. As stated in the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE found it appropriate to forgo a public hearing 
given the limited scope of issues addressed in the proposal, but also 
stated that DOE would hold a public meeting on the November 2024 NOPR 
if one was requested. DOE did not receive any comments requesting a 
public meeting. DOE also determined in the November 2024 NOPR that 30 
days was an appropriate period for providing comments, given the 
limited scope of issues addressed in the proposal. 89 FR 87803, 87806.

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule

    In this final rule, DOE amends its test cloth specifications as 
follows:
    (1) Specify that fabric weight and thread count must be measured on 
finished goods prior to pre-conditioning,
    (2) Clarify that the test cloth be made with a ``granite,'' 
``momie,'' or ``crepe'' weave,
    (3) Allow the use of an alternate test cloth,
    (4) Amend the statistical criteria for a new test cloth lot to be 
considered acceptable for use,
    (5) Restructure and renumber certain sections of appendix J3 for 
clarity, and
    (6) Harmonize the test cloth specifications for clothes washers and 
clothes dryers.
    The adopted amendments are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the 
test procedure provisions prior to the amendments, as well as the 
reason for the adopted changes.

      Table II.1--Summary of Changes in the Amended Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   DOE test procedure prior to       Amended test
            amendment                  procedure          Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not specify at which stage   Specifies that      Industry request;
 of the process the fabric         fabric weight and   improve
 weight and thread count of test   thread count must   reproducibility
 cloth are applicable.             be measured on      of test results.
                                   finished goods
                                   prior to pre-
                                   conditioning.
Specifies the use of ``granite    Specifies the use   Industry request;
 or momie'' weave.                 of ``granite,       clarification of
                                   momie, or crepe''   existing
                                   weave.              requirement.
Specifies one type of allowable   Specifies two       Industry request;
 test cloth.                       types of            reduce test
                                   allowable test      burden while
                                   cloth.              maintaining
                                                       reproducibility
                                                       and
                                                       representativenes
                                                       s.
Specifies that the coefficient    Specifies that the  Reduce test burden
 of variation across nine RMC      coefficient of      while maintaining
 values must be less than or       variation across    reproducibility
 equal to 1 percent.               nine RMC values     and
                                   must be less than   representativenes
                                   or equal to 1.5     s.
                                   percent.
Specifies that the P-value of     Specifies that the  Reduce test burden
 the RMC correction curve must     root-mean-square    while maintaining
 be greater than or equal to 0.1.  error of the RMC    reproducibility
                                   correction curve    and
                                   must be less than   representativenes
                                   or equal to 0.012.  s.
Appendix J3 test cloth            Harmonizes test     Industry request;
 specifications currently apply    cloth               clarify existing
 only to clothes washers.          requirements        requirements
                                   across both         consistent with
                                   clothes washers     industry
                                   and clothes         practice.
                                   dryers and
                                   extends
                                   applicability of
                                   appendix J3 test
                                   cloth
                                   specifications to
                                   both clothes
                                   washers and
                                   clothes dryers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 5523]]

    DOE has determined that the amendments described in section III and 
adopted in this document will not alter the measured efficiency of 
RCWs, CCWs, or consumer clothes dryers, 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

    In the following sections, DOE discusses certain amendments to its 
test procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers. For each 
amendment, DOE provides relevant background information, explains why 
the amendment merits consideration, discusses relevant public comments, 
and its final approach.

A. Scope of Applicability

    This rulemaking applies to clothes washers (both RCWs and CCWs, 
which use the same test procedures) \14\ and consumer clothes dryers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The test procedures for CCWs must be the same as those 
established for RCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(8)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has defined a clothes washer as a consumer product designed to 
clean clothes, utilizing a water solution of soap and/or detergent and 
mechanical agitation or other movement, that must be one of the 
following classes: automatic clothes washers,\15\ semi-automatic 
clothes washers,\16\ and other clothes washers.\17\ 10 CFR 430.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ An ``automatic clothes washer'' is a class of clothes 
washer that has a control system that is capable of scheduling a 
preselected combination of operations, such as regulation of water 
temperature, regulation of the water fill level, and performance of 
wash, rinse, drain, and spin functions without the need for user 
intervention subsequent to the initiation of machine operation. Some 
models may require user intervention to initiate these different 
segments of the cycle after the machine has begun operation, but 
they do not require the user to intervene to regulate the water 
temperature by adjusting the external water faucet valves. 10 CFR 
430.2
    \16\ A ``semi-automatic clothes washer'' is a class of clothes 
washer that is the same as an automatic clothes washer except that 
user intervention is required to regulate the water temperature by 
adjusting the external water faucet valves. Id.
    \17\ ``Other clothes washer'' means a class of clothes washer 
that is not an automatic or semi-automatic clothes washer. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE regulations also define ``electric clothes dryer'' and ``gas 
clothes dryer'' similarly as a cabinet-like appliance designed to dry 
fabrics in a tumble-type drum with forced air circulation, with 
blower(s) driven by an electric motor(s) and either electricity or gas, 
respectively, as the heat source. See, 10 CFR 430.2. DOE's clothes 
dryer test procedures are applicable to both electric and gas clothes 
dryers.
    A commercial clothes washer is defined as a soft-mount front-
loading or soft-mount top-loading clothes washer that--
    (A) Has a clothes container compartment that-
    (i) For horizontal-axis clothes washers, is not more than 3.5 cubic 
feet; and
    (ii) For vertical-axis clothes washers, is not more than 4.0 cubic 
feet; and
    (B) Is designed for use in-
    (i) Applications in which the occupants of more than one household 
will be using the clothes washer, such as multi-family housing common 
areas and coin laundries; or
    (ii) Other commercial applications.
    (42 U.S.C. 6311(21); 10 CFR 431.452)
    DOE is not changing the scope of the RCW, CCW, or consumer clothes 
dryer test procedures, or the relevant definitions, in this final rule.

B. Relevant Historical Background

    This section summarizes the historical background of test cloth 
specifications in DOE's clothes washer and clothes dryer test 
procedures that is relevant to topics discussed in this final rule.
    DOE first introduced the use of test cloth into the original 
clothes dryer test procedure established by the final rule published 
September 14, 1977 (``September 1977 Clothes Dryer Final Rule''). 42 FR 
46145. The test cloth specifications were a 50-percent cotton and 50-
percent polyester blended material, representative of the range of 
fabrics comprising consumer wash loads. Id. at 42 FR 46146. The 
September 1977 Clothes Dryer Final Rule also established a maximum use 
of 25 clothes dryer test cycles for each piece of test cloth to reduce 
potential variability in the test results that may occur from any 
change in the composition of the test cloth due to continued drying of 
the same test cloth. Id.
    DOE introduced the use of test cloth into the original clothes 
washer test procedure established by the final rule published September 
28, 1977 (``September 1977 Clothes Washer Final Rule''). 42 FR 49802. 
As discussed in the September 1977 Clothes Washer Final Rule, the size 
and composition of the test load was chosen to be identical to the test 
load that had been specified for clothes dryers in the September 1977 
Clothes Dryer Final Rule. Id. at 49 FR 49805. The number of test runs 
for each piece of test cloth was limited to no more than 25 clothes 
washer test cycles. Id. at 49 FR 49808.
    Since introducing the use of test cloth into the originally 
established clothes dryer and clothes washer test procedures, DOE has 
periodically updated the test cloth specifications and requirements. 
The following paragraphs summarize some of these changes to test cloth 
specifications and requirements that are relevant to the amendments in 
this document.
    In a final rule published May 19, 1981 (``May 1981 Final Rule''), 
DOE amended the clothes dryer test procedure to, among other changes, 
establish test cloth pre-conditioning requirements to improve test 
repeatability by ensuring that the test cloth not contain any water-
soluble sizing or finishing agents that could affect the moisture 
performance of test cloth. 46 FR 27324. The May 1981 Final Rule also 
established a weight tolerance on the test cloth. Id.
    In a final rule published August 27, 1997, DOE amended its test 
cloth requirements in the clothes washer test procedure by adding a new 
requirement to prewash (i.e., pre-condition) new test cloth prior to 
first use for energy consumption testing. 62 FR 45484.
    DOE published a final rule on January 12, 2001 (``January 2001 
Final Rule'') that, among other changes to the clothes washer test 
procedure, introduced the modified energy factor descriptor, which 
incorporated an estimate of clothes drying energy into the clothes 
washer efficiency descriptor through consideration of the RMC of the 
clothes leaving the clothes washer. 66 FR 3314. As discussed in the 
January 2001 Final Rule, it had been discovered that the test cloth to 
be used for determining the RMC was giving inconsistent results. Id. at 
66 FR 3317. DOE investigated possible causes for the inconsistent test 
results and summarized the results in a report published in May 2000 
titled Development of a Standardized Energy Test Cloth for Measuring 
Remaining Moisture Content in a Residential Clothes Washer (``May 2000 
Test Cloth Report'').\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The May 2000 Test Cloth Report is available at 
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2006-STD-0064-0277.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, relevant to topics discussed in this final rule, the 
May 2000 Test Cloth Report documented the difficulty of relating 
specifiable test

[[Page 5524]]

cloth characteristics--fiber content, weight, etc.--to RMC 
measurements. (See section 4 of May 2000 Test Cloth Report). On this 
basis, DOE concluded that tighter test cloth specifications alone would 
not necessarily lead to comparably consistent RMC measurements. To 
provide more consistent RMC measurements from lot to lot, the May 2000 
Test Cloth Report proposed a new method for developing a ``correction 
factor'' for each new lot of test cloth. The correction factor would be 
applied to the RMC measurement to normalize the RMC results to match 
the RMC performance of a designated ``standard lot.''
    The May 2000 Test Cloth Report also concluded that a viable 
approach to minimize the effects of test cloth variation on RMC would 
be to consistently specify a single type of fabric that is produced 
frequently by one mill to a consistent set of specifications. The 
report recommended the use of a 50-percent cotton/50-percent polyester 
momie weave fabric from one particular mill as a suitable choice, 
noting that this cloth (at the time) was produced in high volume, had 
been produced to a consistent specification for many years, and was 
likely to continue to be produced on this basis for the foreseeable 
future. (See section 6 of May 2000 Test Cloth Report).
    The May 2000 Test Cloth Report recommended a set of test cloth 
specifications and an RMC correction factor approach that could be 
adopted into the DOE test procedure. The January 2001 Final Rule 
incorporated into the clothes washer test procedures many of the 
recommendations of the May 2000 Test Cloth Report, including the 
recommended updates to the test cloth specifications and the RMC 
correction factor procedure. The January 2001 Final Rule also increased 
the number of allowable test runs for each piece of test cloth to no 
more than 60 clothes washer test cycles (from 25 previously). 66 FR 
3314, 3320.
    DOE published a direct final rule on October 31, 2003 (``October 
2003 Final Rule'') that, among other changes to the clothes washer test 
procedure, added as a testing requirement the use of a statistical 
analysis approach to qualify any interactive effect between different 
lots of test cloth and spin speeds to further improve consistency of 
the RMC measurement. 68 FR 62198.
    On March 7, 2012, DOE published a final rule (``March 2012 Final 
Rule'') that, among other changes, updated certain test cloth 
specifications for clothes washer testing based on recommendations 
provided by AHAM. 77 FR 13888, 13920-13921. Specifically, the March 
2012 Final Rule adopted definitions for cloth ``lot'' and ``roll'' and 
established test cloth weight tolerances. Id. at 77 FR 13921-13922. The 
March 2012 Final Rule also updated pre-conditioning wash requirements 
and incorporated American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists 
(``AATCC'') test methods for verifying the absence of water-repellent 
finishes on the test cloth. Id. at 77 FR 13922.
    In a final rule published on August 5, 2015 (``August 2015 Final 
Rule''), DOE moved the standard extractor RMC procedure for developing 
the correction factors for each new test cloth lot from appendix J2 to 
the newly created appendix J3. 80 FR 46730.
    In a final rule published on June 1, 2022 (``June 2022 Final 
Rule''), among other changes, DOE further consolidated clothes washer 
test cloth-related provisions into appendix J3 (from appendix J2) to 
improve the overall logical flow of both test procedures. Id. at 87 FR 
33367. DOE additionally codified in appendix J3 a test cloth material 
verification procedure that had historically been used by the AHAM task 
force when evaluating new lots of test cloth. Id. at 87 FR 33368.

C. Test Cloth Specifications and Requirements

    In this final rule, DOE is updating its test cloth specifications 
and requirements to (1) further improve consistency in test results 
across different lots of test cloth, (2) clarify certain requirements 
consistent with textile industry nomenclature, (3) allow the use of an 
alternate type of test cloth that has been shown to exhibit performance 
consistent with the current test cloth, and (4) re-define appropriate 
thresholds for certain statistical requirements specified for new lots 
of test cloth.
    Each of the changes are in line with DOE's historical practice of 
regularly updating its test cloth specifications to improve the 
consistency of test results and adapt to changes in material 
specifications and availability of commercially available textiles.
    In this section, DOE addresses clothes washer specifications in 
appendix J3 specifically. As discussed in section III.C.3 of this 
document, DOE is harmonizing the clothes washer and clothes dryer test 
cloth specifications such that the edits in this section apply to both 
product types.
1. Cut Orientation
    Section 3.1 of appendix J3 specifies that the test cloth material 
should come from a roll of material with a width of approximately 63 
inches, although other sizes may be used if the test cloth material 
meets the specifications listed in sections 3.2 through 3.6 of appendix 
J3. Section 3.7.1 of appendix J3 specifies the dimensions of the 
individual energy test cloths--nominally 24 inches by 36 inches prior 
to hemming.\19\ Furthermore, section 5 of appendix J3 specifies that 
the maximum shrinkage requirements for the energy test cloth after pre-
conditioning \20\ must not be more than 5 percent of the length and 
width.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Section 3.7.2 of appendix J3 specifies dimensions of 
smaller energy ``stuffer'' cloths, which are nominally 12 inches by 
12 inches prior to hemming. Since the energy stuffer cloths are 
square, the consideration of cut orientation in this section of the 
document pertains only to the rectangular energy test cloths.
    \20\ The pre-conditioning process is specified in section 5 of 
appendix J3 and consists of five wash-rinse-spin cycles, with the 
load bone-dried between each of the five cycles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Appendix J3 does not specify the orientation of the rectangular 
dimensions (i.e., lengthwise versus widthwise) for cutting individual 
energy test cloths from the roll of fabric. As such, the cut 
orientation of the rectangular energy test cloths can be optimized to 
minimize wasted fabric (e.g., a lengthwise cut of 36 inches adjacent to 
a widthwise cut of 24 inches could be patterned on a 63-inch width roll 
of material with minimal waste).
    The May 2024 AHAM Letter recommended that appendix J3 specify that 
the energy test cloth be cut in a specific orientation relative to the 
fabric roll. Specifically, the May 2024 AHAM Letter suggested that the 
24-inch dimension be cut from the lengthwise (i.e., ``warp'') direction 
of the roll and the 36-inch dimension be cut from the widthwise (i.e., 
``weft'') direction of the roll, as depicted in Figure III.1.

[[Page 5525]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17JA25.090

    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE discussed that differences in cut 
orientation can impact the relative shrinking of cloth in each 
direction after repeated wash and dry cycles, which could potentially 
affect its water absorption and retention properties--characteristics 
that are particularly relevant to the RMC measurement.\21\ 89 FR 87803, 
87809. The May 2024 AHAM Letter did not, however, provide any data or 
quantitative evaluation of whether, or to what extent, the direction of 
cut orientation could affect the shrinkage of the energy test cloth, or 
the RMC measurement in the clothes washer test procedure. In the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that even if the cut orientation could 
impact the relative shrinkage of the length and width of the energy 
test cloth, section 5 of appendix J3 already specifies a maximum 
allowable shrinkage of 5 percent in each direction. Id. DOE added that 
it had no information to suggest that any variation in shrinkage within 
this 5 percent tolerance would have a substantive impact on the 
resulting RMC measurement in the clothes washer test procedure. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ As discussed, RMC is a measure of the remaining water 
content of the clothes washer load at the end of the wash cycle and 
is used to incorporate an estimate of clothes drying energy into the 
clothes washer efficiency descriptor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE further raised concerns about 
potential unintended consequences of requiring a specific cut 
orientation for each energy test cloth. Id. DOE noted that depending on 
the width of the fabric roll, specifying a cut orientation as suggested 
in the May 2024 AHAM Letter could prevent the optimization of cut 
patterns as described previously (i.e., a 36-inch lengthwise cut 
adjacent to a 24-inch widthwise cut on a 63-inch width roll of 
material), resulting in increased fabric waste and a corresponding 
increase in material cost. Id. For instance, a 63-inch-wide roll as 
specified by section 3.1 of appendix J3 would be able to accommodate 
only a single 36-inch wide cut as suggested by AHAM, resulting in 
nearly 40 percent of the roll material being wasted. And although 
section 3.1 of appendix J3 permits the use of other size rolls, DOE 
noted that textiles are typically woven in standardized widths and 
expressed concern that fabricating rolls with a custom width for DOE 
test cloth could increase the material cost. Id.
    In summary, in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE expressed uncertainty as 
to whether, or to what extent, the energy test cloth cut orientation 
could impact the RMC measurement in the clothes washer test procedure, 
and whether specifying a particular cut orientation could result in 
fabric waste that would lead to an increase in material cost. Id.
    Irrespective of its determination regarding the specification of a 
cut orientation requirement, in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively 
determined that section 3.1 of appendix J3 is superfluous,\22\ given 
that the suggested parameters regarding the width and length dimensions 
of the roll (i.e., a roll width of approximately 63 inches and 
approximately 500 yards per roll) are rendered moot by the accompanying 
provision allowing for rolls of other sizes to be used. Id. at 89 FR 
87810. As such, in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed removing 
section 3.1 of appendix J3 and renumbering the subsequent sections 
accordingly. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Section 3.1 of appendix J3 specifies that the test cloth 
material should come from a roll of material with a width of 
approximately 63 inches and approximately 500 yards per roll. 
However, other sizes may be used if the test cloth material meets 
the specifications listed in sections 3.2 through 3.6 of appendix 
J3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the roll 
dimensions and cut orientations that are currently used to fabricate 
DOE test cloth. Id. DOE also requested comment as to whether, or to 
what extent, the energy test cloth cut orientation could impact the RMC 
measurement in the clothes washer test procedure. Id.

[[Page 5526]]

    DOE further requested comment on its concern that establishing a 
cut orientation requirement could lead to fabric waste, depending on 
the dimensions of the fabric roll. Id. DOE also requested comment on 
its tentative determination not to specify a cut orientation 
requirement, and whether it should adopt the cut orientation 
requirement specified by AHAM or any other cut orientation requirement. 
Id. DOE requested comment on its tentative determination that section 
3.1 of appendix J3 is superfluous and its proposal to remove the 
requirements in section 3.1 of appendix J3. Id.
    AHAM commented that it specifically supports the roll dimension and 
cut orientation amendments to appendix J3 proposed in the November 2024 
NOPR. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 1)
    Ravnitzky commented that allowing flexibility in test cloth 
specifications, such as adjustments in cut orientations and fabric 
dimensions, would help reduce fabric waste and lower material costs 
without compromising test integrity. Ravnitzky added that this 
practical approach would benefit both the industry and sustainability 
efforts. (Ravnitzky, No. 5 at p. 1)
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 
2024 NOPR, to not specify a cut orientation requirement and to remove 
the requirements in section 3.1 of appendix J3.
2. Fabric Weight and Thread Count
    Section 3.3 of appendix J3 specifies that the fabric weight of the 
test cloth must be 5.60  0.25 ounces per square yard, but 
it does not currently specify at what point in the fabrication process 
this specification applies. Similarly, section 3.4 of appendix J3 
specifies that the thread count of the test cloth must be 65 x 57 
threads per inch  2 percent, but it does not currently 
specify at what point in the fabrication process this specification 
applies. The May 2024 AHAM Letter requested that DOE amend these 
specifications to clarify that fabric weight and thread count 
specifications apply to ``finished goods'' test cloth prior to pre-
conditioning. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted the term ``finished 
goods'' means after the cloth has been hemmed into energy test cloth 
and energy stuffer cloths, but prior to any pre-conditioning. 89 FR 
87803, 87810.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE further noted that specifying that 
these requirements apply to finished goods (as opposed to prior to the 
cloth having been processed, de-starched, and hemmed), but prior to any 
pre-conditioning, is the most appropriate point in the cloth 
fabrication process because these dimensional properties can change 
during certain stages of the cloth fabrication process. Id. In the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE stated that applying these specifications to 
finished goods therefore ensures the consistency of each test cloth lot 
at the state in which the test cloth is purchased by a manufacturer or 
test laboratory. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to specify within section 3 
of appendix J3 that fabric weight and thread count specifications apply 
to finished goods prior to pre-conditioning, and requested feedback on 
this proposal. Id.
    NEEA commented that it supports specifying a point in the 
manufacturing and preconditioning process at which the fabric weight 
and thread count are measured. (NEEA, No. 8 at p. 2)
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 
2024 NOPR, to specify in section 3 of appendix J3 that fabric weight 
and thread count specifications apply to finished goods prior to pre-
conditioning.
3. Granite Weave
    Section 3.2 of appendix J3 currently states that the test cloth 
used for clothes washer testing must be a pure finished bleached cloth, 
made with a momie or granite weave. As discussed in the May 2024 AHAM 
Letter, recent lots 25A and 25B \23\ were woven with a different type 
of granite weave--a ``crepe'' weave--than the ``momie'' type of granite 
weave that has historically been used for DOE test cloth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The AHAM task force designated the two most recent lots of 
test cloth ``25A'' and ``25B'' to reflect that these two lots were 
manufactured at the same time using the same continuous weaving 
process, although they were finished in separate batch processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To evaluate whether using a crepe weave would impact test results 
compared to the historical momie weave, DOE conducted comparative 
testing of RCWs and consumer clothes dryers using Lot 25A (made with a 
crepe weave) and previous test cloth Lot 23 (made with a momie weave). 
89 FR 87803, 87810. The results of DOE's testing are presented in a 
Technical Appendix published in the docket for this rulemaking.\24\ The 
testing presented in the November 2024 NOPR showed no substantive 
variation in RMC, integrated modified energy factor (``IMEF''), or 
integrated water factor--the reported metrics for RCWs--or in combined 
energy factor--the reported metric for consumer clothes dryers--between 
the different granite weave types (i.e., traditional momie versus crepe 
weave). Id. Although DOE's test sample in the November 2024 NOPR did 
not include any CCWs, DOE noted that it expects that the trends in RMC 
values, energy use, and water use that it observed in RCWs would apply 
to CCWs, given that RCWs and CCWs are designed and operate similarly 
and are tested using the same test procedure. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Technical Appendix can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that through its participation 
in discussions with the AHAM task force it understands that very few 
textile mills maintain the capability to fabricate cloth using the type 
of momie weave that has traditionally been used to produce DOE test 
cloth. Id. DOE noted that, instead, the type of crepe weave used for 
Lot 25A is expected to be more readily available going forward. Id.
    Appendix J3 currently does not define the terms ``momie'' or 
``granite'' weave. In the May 2024 AHAM Letter, AHAM suggested that DOE 
establish definitions for these terms in appendix J3.\25\ In the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that momie, granite, and crepe weave 
types are generally understood terms of art within the textile 
industry, but there is not a definitive source for definitions of these 
terms. Id. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE expressed concerns that 
creating its own definitions for these terms could inadvertently 
conflict with the range of weave styles that are generally understood 
by the textile industry to be granite weaves. Id. Therefore, in the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined not to establish a 
definition for these terms within the appendix J3 test procedure. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ AHAM suggested defining ``granite weave'' as a broad 
classification of weave producing a small, irregular, pebbled 
surface similar to crepe fabrics; fabrics made with a granite weave 
are generally interlaced tightly, and warp and filling yarns appear 
on the face. AHAM suggested defining ``momie/granite weave fabric'' 
as test cloth made with granite weave fabric as specified in the 
suggested definition of granite weave.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested feedback on its proposal 
to add the term ``crepe'' to the list of allowable weaves in appendix 
J3. Id. DOE further requested feedback on its tentative determination 
not to establish definitions for ``crepe,'' ``granite,'' or ``momie'' 
weave in appendix J3. Id.
    Aside from the generally supportive comments discussed previously, 
DOE received no comments in response to

[[Page 5527]]

the November 2024 NOPR specifically regarding its proposal to add the 
term ``crepe'' to the list of allowable weaves in appendix J3, or its 
tentative determination not to establish definitions for ``crepe,'' 
``granite,'' or ``momie'' weave in appendix J3.
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 
2024 NOPR, to add the term ``crepe'' to the list of allowable weaves in 
appendix J3, and to not establish definitions for ``crepe,'' 
``granite,'' or ``momie'' weave in appendix J3.
4. Alternate Test Cloth
    DOE is required to ensure that the test procedure is reasonably 
designed to produce test results that measure energy efficiency, energy 
use, water use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered 
product/equipment during a representative average use cycle or period 
of use and is not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 
42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) In establishing the current test cloth 
specifications, DOE considered the representativeness of the range of 
fabrics comprising consumer wash loads, the manufacturability of the 
fabric, the consistency in test cloth production, and the consistency 
in test results from the fabric. 66 FR 3314, 3318 (Jan. 12, 2001).
    As discussed, the current test cloth specifications were 
recommended by the May 2000 Test Cloth Report, which noted that this 
cloth (at the time) was produced in high volume, had been produced to a 
consistent specification for many years, and was likely to continue to 
be produced on this basis for the foreseeable future. (See section 6 of 
May 2000 Test Cloth Report.) The May 2000 Test Cloth Report also 
highlighted the benefits of specifying a single type of fabric that is 
produced frequently by one mill to a consistent set of specifications.
    However, while the test cloth specified in appendix J3 continues to 
be produced by a single supplier, DOE noted in the November 2024 NOPR 
that it now understands through its participation in the AHAM task 
force that this cloth is produced exclusively for use in conducting the 
DOE test procedure (i.e., this specific cloth is not used to any 
significant extent by any other industry bodies or for any other 
regulatory or research and development purposes). 89 FR 87803, 87811. 
As such, it is no longer the case that this cloth is produced in high 
volume (beyond the volume needed for DOE testing purposes), leading to 
uncertainty as to whether this cloth is likely to remain readily 
available on a consistent basis for the foreseeable future. Id.
    As discussed in the November 2024 NOPR, during the COVID-19 
pandemic, the laundry industry experienced shortages in DOE test cloth 
supply.\26\ Id. The specialized nature of the DOE test cloth (i.e., the 
fact the cloth is unique to DOE testing needs and produced in 
relatively low volumes) inhibited the ability to identify alternate 
sources of supply for the test cloth. Id. To mitigate this shortage, 
AHAM requested that DOE use its enforcement discretion to allow 
extended use of test cloth beyond the currently defined cycle 
limits.\27\ On September 28, 2023, DOE issued a statement \28\ that it 
would exercise its enforcement discretion and not impose civil 
penalties on a clothes washer, commercial clothes washer, or clothes 
dryer manufacturer for certifying compliance with DOE's energy 
conservation standards based on testing that exceeds the maximum test 
cloth run provision set forth in the DOE test procedures. Instead, DOE 
allowed for usage of test cloth for twice the number of runs allowed in 
the relevant test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ AHAM informed DOE on March 3, 2022 that there were 
significant issues with the quality and availability of the required 
test cloth material for the applicable energy tests for clothes 
washers and clothes dryers.
    \27\ On August 7, 2023, AHAM informed DOE that test cloth 
shortages were persisting and that this supply shortage could also 
eventually impact DOE's ability to conduct assessment, enforcement, 
or other testing.
    \28\ Available at www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-09/Test%20Cloth%20Policy%20for%20Clothes%20Washers%20and%20Clothes%20Dryers%20Enforcement%20Policy.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an effort to further alleviate any test cloth supply constraints 
that could limit energy testing activities for clothes washers and 
clothes dryers, the AHAM task force evaluated the potential merits of 
specifying an alternate test cloth that could be used for DOE testing, 
as discussed in the May 2024 AHAM Letter.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that the AHAM task force 
identified a commercially available standardized fabric as a possible 
alternative to the current test cloth specification. Id. This fabric is 
used as ``ballast'' for testing specific material attributes (such as 
colorfastness) of textiles and, according to the May 2024 AHAM Letter, 
has been used by the textile industry for over 80 years. Specifically, 
the fabric meets the specifications of Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth 
specified by industry standard AATCC LP1-2021, Laboratory Procedure for 
Home Laundering: Machine Washing.\29\ The specifications for Laundering 
Ballast Type 3 cloth are provided in Table III.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021 provides specifications for 
various types of cloth, one of which is designated as Laundering 
Ballast Type 3.

  Table III.1--Specifications for Laundering Ballast Type 3 Cloth From
                             AATCC LP1-2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Characteristic                       Specification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiber Content................  50% cotton/50% polyester  3%.
Greige Fabric Yarns..........  16/1 or 30/2 ring spun.
Greige Fabric Construction...  52 x 48  5 yarns per inch,
                                plain weave.
Finished Fabric Weight.......  155  10 grams per square
                                meter (4.57  0.29 ounces per
                                square yard).
Edges........................  All edges hemmed or over-edged.
Finished Piece Size..........  920 x 920  30 millimeters
                                (36.0 x 36.0  1 inch).
Finished Piece Weight........  130  10 grams (4.59  0.35 ounces).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of an AHAM task force investigation, DOE and AHAM members 
conducted comparative testing of Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth \30\ 
to evaluate whether this cloth could be used to conduct the DOE test 
procedures and whether doing so would produce test results comparable 
to the currently specified test cloth. Id. The

[[Page 5528]]

results of DOE's testing are presented in the Technical Appendix 
published in the docket for this rulemaking.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The tested cloth used 16/1 fabric yarns and was sized to 
match the DOE energy test cloth and energy stuffer cloth dimensions 
and hemming instructions (as currently specified in section 3.7.1 
and 3.7.2 of appendix J3, respectively) instead of the finished 
piece dimensions specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021.
    \31\ The Technical Appendix can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, as discussed in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE tested 
six RCWs and eight consumer clothes dryers, representing eight 
manufacturers and all major product classes; AHAM members additionally 
conducted testing of eight RCWs and six consumer clothes dryers, 
representing all major product classes. Id. These products were tested 
to their rated appendix (D1, D2, or J2) using both the current DOE test 
cloth and the Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth. Id.
    As discussed in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE's testing demonstrated 
no substantive difference in measured efficiency compared with 
historical lots used for RCW and consumer clothes dryer testing. Id. In 
particular for clothes washers, the Laundering Ballast Type 3 produced 
RMC results comparable to existing DOE test cloth using the currently 
specified correction factor approach. Id. In the November 2024 NOPR, 
DOE discussed that although its test sample did not include any CCWs, 
DOE expects that the trends in RMC values, energy use, and water use 
that it observed in RCWs would apply to CCWs, given that RCWs and CCWs 
are designed and operate similarly and are tested using the same test 
procedure. Id. at 89 FR 87811-87812.
    In addition, AHAM presented the results of its members' testing in 
appendix A to the May 2024 AHAM Letter. As discussed in the November 
2024 NOPR, this testing also demonstrated no substantive difference in 
measured efficiency compared with historical lots used for RCW and 
consumer clothes dryer testing. Id. at 89 FR 87812.
    Based on these data, DOE tentatively determined in the November 
2024 NOPR that the AATCC Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth provides 
results that are equally as representative as results obtained using 
the currently specified test cloth. Id. On this basis, in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE proposed, consistent with the recommendations from the 
May 2024 AHAM Letter, to amend appendix J3 to allow for the use of 
AATCC Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth, with a specific yarn size, and 
cut and hemmed to the DOE energy test cloth dimensions. Id.
    Specifically, DOE proposed in the November 2024 NOPR to incorporate 
by reference AATCC LP1-2021 into appendix J3 and to allow the use of 
test cloth meeting the specifications of Laundering Ballast Type 3, as 
specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021, with the following additional 
specifications and substitutions:
     Greige Fabric Yarns: Type 16/1 only \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ As discussed previously, comparative testing was conducted 
only on fabric with 16/1 yarn type, which is a single-string yarn 
similar in thickness to the 15/1 yarn type currently specified in 
section 3.5 of appendix J3. No testing was conducted on fabric with 
30/2 yarn type--the other fabric yarn option specified in Table VII 
of AATCC LP1-2021--which is a two-string version of yarn with each 
string roughly half the diameter of the single-string version.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Edges: All edges hemmed only \33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ As discussed previously, comparative testing was conducted 
only on fabric matching the hemming instructions currently specified 
in sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of appendix J3. No testing was conducted 
on over-edged pieces of test cloth (i.e., the other edging option 
specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Finished Piece Size: Dimensions in accordance with 
sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of appendix J3 for energy test cloths and 
energy stuffer cloths, respectively.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ As discussed previously, comparative testing was conducted 
only on fabric matching the dimensions currently specified in 
sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of appendix J3. No testing was conducted on 
fabric pieces matching the dimensions as specified in Table VII of 
AATCC LP1-2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Finished Piece Weight: Disregard.\35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ The Finished Piece Weight specified in Table VII of AATCC 
LP1-2021 corresponds to the Finished Piece Size specified in the 
same table; as such, this specification does not apply to fabric 
pieces matching the proposed finished piece dimensions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, and consistent with the discussion in section III.C.3 
of this document, DOE considered in the November 2024 NOPR whether to 
propose a definition for ``plain weave'' as specified in Table VII of 
AATCC LP1-2021. Id. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted the term 
``plain weave'' to be a well-understood term of art and therefore 
tentatively determined that adding a definition of ``plain weave'' to 
appendix J3 was not warranted. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
allow the use of Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth specified in AATCC 
LP1-2021 (with certain additional specifications) as an alternate test 
cloth for conducting clothes washer and clothes dryer testing. Id. DOE 
also requested feedback on its tentative determination not to establish 
a definition for ``plain weave'' in appendix J3. Id.
    NEEA commented that it specifically supports allowing the use of 
the Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth specified in AATCC LP1-2021 (with 
certain additional specifications) as an alternate test cloth for 
conducting clothes washer and clothes dryer testing. (NEEA, No. 8 at p. 
2)
    Ravnitzky commented in support of the alternate test cloth proposed 
in the November 2024 NOPR to address potential supply shortages and 
ensure consistent and reliable results, based on thorough testing. 
(Ravnitzky, No. 5 at p. 1)
    AHAM commented that it supports DOE's proposal in the November 2024 
NOPR to not establish a definition for ``plain weave'' in appendix J3. 
(AHAM, No. 10 at p. 1)
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 
2024 NOPR, to allow the use of test cloth corresponding to the 
Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth specified in AATCC LP1-2021 (with 
certain additional specifications) as an alternate test cloth for 
conducting clothes washer and clothes dryer testing, and to not 
establish a definition for ``plain weave'' in appendix J3. In this 
final rule, DOE is implementing this in appendix J3 by directly 
codifying each of the cloth specifications within appendix J3, rather 
than incorporating by reference Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021 with 
modifications (as was proposed in the November 2024 NOPR). As discussed 
in section III.D.3 of this document, as a result of the amendments in 
this final rule, the specifications in appendix J3 apply to both 
clothes washers and clothes dryers.
    In response to the November 2024 NOPR, AHAM commented that section 
3.1.2.3 of appendix J3 as proposed in the November 2024 NOPR \36\ 
should reference section 3.3 instead of section 3.7.1 and 3.7.2. (AHAM, 
No. 10 at p. 5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Section 3.1.2.3 of the proposed regulatory text in the 
November 2024 NOPR specified the following: Finished piece size. 
Dimensions in accordance with sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of [appendix 
J3] for energy test cloths and energy stuffer cloths, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE agrees with AHAM's assessment of the incorrect cross-references 
in the proposed amendments to section 3.1.2.3 of appendix J3. However, 
these proposed cross-references are rendered moot by the approach taken 
in this final rule to directly codify each of the test cloth 
specifications within appendix J3.
5. Uniformity Criteria
    In the June 2022 Final Rule, DOE codified a prequalification 
procedure to be performed on each new lot of test cloth to verify the 
uniformity of the test cloth throughout the beginning, middle, and end 
of the lot. 87 FR 33316. As discussed in the June 2022 Final Rule,

[[Page 5529]]

DOE had received a request from members of the AHAM task force to add 
to appendix J3 additional steps to the qualification procedure that 
have historically been performed on each new lot of test cloth to 
ensure uniformity of RMC test results on test cloths from the 
beginning, middle, and end of each new lot. Id. at 87 FR 33368. 
Industry practice has been to perform this ``uniformity check'' before 
conducting the procedure to develop the RMC correction factors 
currently specified in appendix J3. Id. Specifically, the uniformity 
check involves performing an RMC measurement on nine bundles of sample 
test cloth representing the beginning, middle, and end locations of the 
first, middle, and last rolls of test cloth in a new lot. Id. In the 
historical procedure provided by the AHAM task force, the coefficient 
of variation (``CV'') across the nine RMC values must be less than or 
equal to 1 percent for the test cloth lot to be considered acceptable 
for use. Id. The amendments codified by the June 2022 Final Rule 
included the suggested requirement for the CV of the ``uniformity 
check'' procedure to be less than or equal to 1 percent. Id. at 87 FR 
33369.
    Shortly after the publication of the June 2022 Final Rule 
establishing the requirement for the CV to be less than or equal to 1 
percent--but prior to its effective date--Lot 24D was produced by the 
test cloth supplier and was measured to have a CV of 1.6 percent. As 
discussed in the November 2024 NOPR, AHAM developed correction factors 
for this lot of test cloth despite its CV over 1 percent, on the basis 
that the new CV requirement had not yet become effective, and that the 
industry was facing a test cloth shortage. 89 FR 87803, 87812.
    Since the effective date of the CV requirement, the AHAM task force 
has developed correction factors for test cloth lots 25A and 25B \37\--
both with CV values of 1.1 percent. AHAM stated in letters to DOE that 
it based its recommendations to proceed with these test cloth lots on 
the ongoing test cloth shortages, DOE's historical acceptance of lots 
with CVs exceeding 1 percent, and the extensive testing that DOE 
performed of Lot 25A, as described in section III.C.3 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See letters received by DOE on December 13, 2023 and May 
24, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE noted that the 1-percent threshold 
was originally recommended by AHAM during a previous test procedure 
rulemaking. Id. citing 87 FR 33316, 33368 (Jun. 1, 2022). DOE further 
noted that prior to the codification of the pre-qualification 
procedure, the AHAM task force used its discretion to evaluate the 
uniformity of each new test cloth lot. 89 FR 87803, 87812. DOE noted 
that it understood the repeatable performance of test cloth lots with a 
CV slightly higher than 1 percent--as shown by the testing of Lot 25A 
described in section III.C.3 of this document--to be an indication that 
the 1-percent threshold may be unnecessarily stringent (i.e., too low). 
Id. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend appendix J3 by 
increasing the allowable CV threshold to 2 percent. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested feedback on its proposal 
to amend the CV threshold requirement in appendix J3 from 1 percent to 
2 percent. Specifically, DOE requested comment on whether another 
threshold would be more appropriate. Id.
    NEEA commented that it supports increasing the CV of the 
``uniformity check'' from 1 percent to 2 percent. (NEEA, No. 8 at p. 2) 
NEEA noted that it has extensive experience testing laundry products 
with common and emerging technologies using a variety of textiles. (Id. 
at p. 1)
    AHAM commented that it agrees with DOE's statement in the November 
2024 NOPR that repeatable performance of test cloth lots with a CV 
slightly higher than 1 percent is an indication that the threshold may 
be unnecessarily stringent. However, AHAM expressed reluctance with a 
2-percent threshold, stating that a CV threshold of 2 percent would 
result in a within-lot variation of up to 1 RMC percentage point, and 
instead suggested a CV limit of 1.5 percent. AHAM commented that this 
threshold would exclude lots 19, 24B, and 24D, which AHAM characterized 
as highly variable and problematic lots. (AHAM, No. 10 at pp. 3-4)
    As discussed, EPCA requires that any test procedures 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); 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) DOE tentatively 
determined in the November 2024 NOPR that increasing the allowable CV 
threshold to 2 percent would reduce test burden while maintaining 
reproducibility and representativeness \38\ of test results. DOE 
understands that the cost of the test cloth factors in the cost of pre-
qualification testing as specified in appendix J3. If the pre-
qualification test must be repeated, either on subdivided portions of 
the test cloth lot or on a different test cloth lot, in order to 
achieve an allowable CV value, the cost of the qualified test cloth and 
thus test burden for clothes washer and clothes dryer manufacturers may 
increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Table II.1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test 
Procedures Relative to Current Test Procedures in the November 2024 
NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the comments received from NEEA and AHAM, both of which 
have extensive experience testing clothes washers and clothes dryers, 
DOE understands that there is general support to increase the threshold 
to 1.5 percent, but only mixed support to increase the threshold to 2 
percent. DOE understands AHAM's comment as indicating that, despite 
historical test cloth lots with CV values greater than 1.5 percent 
having been qualified for use, manufacturers would currently find an 
allowable CV threshold of 1.5 percent to reflect the appropriate 
balance between representativeness and test burden. DOE recognizes that 
manufacturers (as represented by AHAM) have extensive experience in 
dealing with differences between test cloth lots, and likewise 
recognizes manufacturers' interest in ensuring repeatable and 
reproducible test results--as the basis for producing representative 
test results--for the purposes of certifying compliance with the 
applicable standards. In consideration of the above, in this final 
rule, DOE is amending the CV threshold requirement in section 7.2.5 of 
appendix J3 from 1 percent to 1.5 percent. DOE further specifies that 
this requirement applies to test cloth lots qualified after February 
18, 2025.
6. Variance P-Value Threshold and Root-Mean-Square Error
    In the October 2003 Final Rule, DOE adopted a statistical 
procedure, called ``analysis of variance'' (or ``ANOVA''), as the lot-
to-lot interactive-effect statistical test for screening out lots of 
test cloth whose RMC behavior is inconsistent with the baseline lot. 68 
FR 62198, 62201. The ANOVA statistical test measures the extent of the 
deviation of the shape of the RMC compared to the g-curve for a given 
lot of the test cloth from the shape of the RMC compared to the g-curve 
for the baseline lot. Id. In the October 2003 Final Rule, DOE explained 
that it believed that the test would catch any unanticipated deviation 
in RMC in future lots. Id.
    Section 8.8 of appendix J3 specifies performing the analysis of 
variance with replication test using two factors, spin speed and lot, 
to determine whether the interaction of speed and lot is

[[Page 5530]]

significant. If the interaction is not significant (as calculated by 
the ``P-value'' of the F-statistic being greater than 0.1), then the 
lot is considered acceptable. If the P-value is less than 0.1, the test 
cloth is deemed unacceptable. The P-value provides an indication of any 
interactive effect between lots and spin speeds. The lower the P-value, 
the stronger the evidence of such an interaction.
    On March 29, 2010, AHAM sent DOE a letter (``March 2010 AHAM 
Letter'') noting that Lot 17 was measured to have a P-value that was 
less than 0.1.\39\ AHAM requested that DOE approve Lot 17 for use on 
the basis that the root-mean-square error (``RMSE'') was less than 2 
percent, the P-value of the test cloth excluding the 100g test 
condition was greater than 0.1, and test cloth supply shortage issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ The March 2010 AHAM Letter is available at 
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The more recent lot of AATCC test cloth evaluated by DOE and AHAM, 
as described in section III.C.4 of this document, had a P-value of 
0.072, which would not meet the requirements of section 8.8 of appendix 
J3. However, the testing conducted by DOE and AHAM \40\ suggests that, 
despite the low P-value, the application of the test cloth correction 
factors produces corrected RMC values that are comparable (i.e., less 
than 1 RMC percentage point difference on average) to the standard RMC 
values for each tested extractor condition. For this reason, in the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that a low P-value is 
not necessarily indicative of a test cloth lot not being acceptable for 
use in the clothes washer test procedures. 89 FR 87803, 87813. DOE 
further tentatively determined that a different statistical measure can 
provide a better measure of the acceptability of a new test cloth lot. 
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See the Technical Appendix available at 
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE evaluated the 
usefulness of the RMSE between the corrected RMC values and the 
standard RMC values for the same test conditions as a potentially more 
relevant statistical measure to evaluate a new test cloth lot. Id. 
Conceptually, this RMSE value represents the closeness of fit of the 
corrected RMC values to the standard RMC values. A smaller RMSE value 
indicates a better closeness of fit. Recognizing that the corrected RMC 
value is used to calculate IMEF, DOE tentatively determined in the 
November 2024 NOPR that RMSE--which evaluates corrected RMC values--
would provide a better measure of acceptability than P-value, which 
evaluates uncorrected RMC values. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR DOE presented RMSE values of the 
historical test cloth lots posted to DOE's website \41\ that fell 
within a range of 0.004 to 0.014. Id. Additionally, DOE stated that the 
AATCC lot of test cloth evaluated by DOE and AHAM, as described in 
section III.C.4 of this document, has an RMSE of 0.009. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ DOE maintains a historical record of the standard extractor 
test data and final correction curve coefficients for each approved 
lot of energy test cloth at www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/articles/clothes-washer-test-cloth-correction-factor-information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the historical record and its testing, DOE tentatively 
determined in the November 2024 NOPR that an RMSE-based threshold for 
new test cloth lots would provide a better measure of the acceptability 
of a new test cloth lot, and therefore proposed to replace the P-value 
evaluation in section 8.8 of appendix J3 with a calculation of RMSE and 
a requirement that the RMSE be below 0.015, which represents a 
threshold slightly higher than the maximum RMSE value of 0.014 observed 
among historical test cloth lots. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
replace the P-value test in appendix J3 with a root-mean-square error 
test, and on its proposal to specify 0.015 as an acceptability 
threshold for the RMSE value. Id.
    Ravnitzky commented in support of the proposed shift from the P-
value test to the RMSE threshold, stating that the proposed RMSE 
threshold of 0.015, based on historical data, provides a more accurate 
measure of test cloth performance and ensures that new test cloth lots 
produce consistent RMC measurements, improving the robustness of the 
testing protocol. (Ravnitzky, No. 5 at p. 1)
    AHAM commented that it does not necessarily oppose DOE's tentative 
determination that an RMSE-based threshold for new test cloth lots 
would provide a better measure of acceptability than the P-value 
evaluation, but suggested certain improvements to the approach. (AHAM, 
No. 10 at p. 4)
    Specifically, AHAM recommended that the RMSE calculation reflect 
the ``N-2'' approach \42\ that has historically been used in the test 
cloth evaluations and is used in the appendix J3 test report template 
today.\43\ AHAM commented that this would change the denominator in 
equation proposed in section 8.9 of draft appendix J3 from 20 to 18. 
(Id. at p. 5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The RMSE, as proposed in the November 2024 NOPR, is equal 
to the square root of the ratio of the sum of the squared errors 
across the test sample divided by the number of values in the test 
sample (N). The ``N-2'' approach refers to a different formula for 
RMSE wherein the denominator of the equation is N-2 instead of N, as 
proposed in the November 2024 NOPR.
    \43\ The appendix J3 test report referenced by AHAM is available 
at www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/standardized-templates-reporting-test-results. DOE develops standardized data templates for reporting 
the results of tests conducted in accordance with current DOE test 
procedures. Templates may be used by third-party laboratories under 
contract with DOE that conduct testing in support of ENERGY STAR 
verification, DOE rulemakings, and enforcement of the federal energy 
conservation standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE notes that in addition to being used in the appendix J3 test 
report (as described by AHAM), the ``N-2'' approach was also used in 
the RMSE calculation previously specified in appendices J1 and J2 as 
codified by the January 2001 Final Rule. See 66 FR 3314, 3332. DOE did 
not intend to change its approach to calculating RMSE compared to the 
approach used in the appendix J3 test report and previously specified 
in appendices J1 and J2.\44\ For this final rule, DOE re-calculated the 
historical test cloth lot RMSE values that were presented in the 
November 2024 NOPR using the ``N-2'' approach.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ The appendix J3 test report uses the STEYX() function in 
Microsoft Excel to calculate RMSE. This function uses N-2 as the 
denominator. In its analysis conducted for the November 2024 NOPR, 
DOE inadvertently used a different formula for calculating RMSE that 
uses N as the denominator.
    \45\ The RMSE values presented in this final rule were 
calculated using the N-2 approach consistent with the formula in 
section 8.9 of appendix J3, as amended in this final rule, using all 
available tested runs. For lots of test cloth prior to Lot 16, where 
the 500g and 650g tests were not performed, the N-2=18 value in the 
denominator of the RMSE formula was updated to N-2=10 to correspond 
to the number of tested runs for these lots of test cloth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AHAM further noted that as presented in the November 2024 NOPR, the 
highest RMSE value of 0.014 is for Lot 6, which included testing at the 
50g force instead of the 100g force testing that has been required 
since the introduction of Lot 7.\46\ AHAM suggested that Lot 6 be 
excluded from the evaluation. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ In the October 2003 Final Rule, the 50g test point resulted 
in inconsistent corrected RMC results. DOE acknowledged a basic lack 
of repeatability of the 50g spin tests and replaced these test 
points with 100g test points. 68 FR 62198, 62200-62201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE notes that Lot 5 was also tested using the 50g test point 
instead of the 100g test point. Due to the lack of repeatability and 
consistency of the previous 50g data point, DOE agrees with AHAM's 
suggestion to exclude Lot 6--as well as Lot 5--from consideration in 
determining an appropriate RMSE threshold.

[[Page 5531]]

    The updated RMSE values used for this final rule analysis are 
presented in Table III.2 of this document. These values reflect use of 
the ``N-2'' approach and exclude Lot 5 and Lot 6.

Table III.2--Historical Test Cloth Lot RMSE Values for Lot 7 Through Lot
                                   25B
                   [Calculated using ``N-2'' approach]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Lot                                 RMSE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.......................................................           0.007
8.......................................................           0.006
9.......................................................           0.006
10......................................................           0.008
11......................................................           0.009
12......................................................           0.010
13......................................................           0.010
14......................................................           0.008
15......................................................           0.005
16......................................................           0.010
17......................................................           0.011
18......................................................           0.010
19......................................................           0.010
20......................................................           0.009
21......................................................           0.010
22......................................................           0.010
23......................................................           0.010
24A.....................................................           0.010
24B.....................................................           0.008
24D.....................................................           0.011
25A.....................................................           0.008
25B.....................................................           0.010
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The updated RMSE values fall within a range of 0.004 to 0.011, 
compared to a range of 0.004 to 0.014 as presented in the November 2024 
NOPR. Additionally, the AATCC lot of test cloth evaluated by DOE and 
AHAM, as described in section III.C.4 of this document, has an updated 
RMSE value of 0.010, compared to a value of 0.009 as presented in the 
November 2024 NOPR. Accordingly, DOE determines that a threshold RMSE 
value of 0.012, as suggested by AHAM, is appropriate.
    Lastly, AHAM requested that the P-value calculation remain in the 
test cloth test report (without an acceptability threshold) so that the 
metric can be monitored and ensure that the change does not have 
unintended consequences. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 4)
    DOE recognizes the benefits to maintaining the P-value calculation 
in the appendix J3 test report, even if no longer used as acceptability 
criteria, and will consider AHAM's suggestion at such time DOE updates 
its appendix J3 test report.
    In summary, in this final rule, DOE is finalizing its proposal to 
replace the P-value test in appendix J3 with an RMSE test. DOE is 
establishing the RMSE threshold requirement in section 8.9 of appendix 
J3 at 0.012, as calculated using the ``N-2'' approach. DOE further 
specifies that this requirement applies to test cloth lots qualified 
after February 18, 2025.

D. Other Clarifying and Restructuring Edits

1. Introductory Paragraph
    Appendix J3 includes test cloth specifications, procedures for pre-
conditioning test cloth, procedures for verifying that new lots of test 
cloth meet the defined material specifications, and procedures for 
developing RMC correction factors. Appendix J3 contains an introductory 
section titled ``Objective'' that summarizes the key objectives of the 
procedure. This paragraph currently does not reference the pre-
conditioning of test cloth as one of the key objectives.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to update the heading to 
appendix J3 and its objective paragraph to explicitly include pre-
conditioning of test cloth as one of the key objectives. 89 FR 87803, 
87813.In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested feedback on its proposal 
to update appendix J3 to explicitly mention pre-conditioning of test 
cloth. Id.
    DOE did not receive any specific comments on this topic and is 
finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 2024 NOPR, to 
update appendix J3 to explicitly include pre-conditioning of test cloth 
as one of the key objectives.
2. Pre-Conditioning Instructions
    Section 5 of appendix J3 provides the test cloth pre-conditioning 
instructions. Currently, this section is organized as a single 
paragraph detailing the entire procedure, whereas other sections of 
appendix J3 are organized with subsections that provide a clearer step-
by-step sequence of instructions.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to restructure section 5 of 
appendix J3 to read as a sequence of instructions rather than a single 
paragraph, for greater clarity and ease of use. 89 FR 87803, 87813.
    DOE did not receive any specific comments on this topic and is 
finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 2024 NOPR, to 
restructure section 5 of appendix J3 to read as a sequence of 
instructions rather than a single paragraph, for greater clarity and 
ease of use.
3. Harmonizing Clothes Washer and Clothes Dryer Test Procedures
    As previously discussed, in the August 2015 Final Rule, DOE moved 
the test cloth qualification procedures from appendix J2 to a newly 
created appendix J3. Appendix J3 is currently referenced by only the 
clothes washer test procedure. Section 2.7 of appendices J and J2 
reference appendix J3 generally for test cloth specifications and 
section 5 of appendix J3 for test cloth pre-conditioning instructions. 
Whereas, for clothes dryers, section 2.6 of appendices D1 and D2 list 
each of the test cloth specifications and detail the test cloth pre-
conditioning requirements.
    As discussed in the November 2024 NOPR, historically, manufacturers 
and test laboratories have used the same test cloth for both clothes 
washers and clothes dryers. 89 FR 87803, 87813. The May 2024 AHAM 
Letter requested that DOE harmonize specifically the pre-conditioning 
procedure for clothes washers and clothes dryers. Id. In line with this 
recommendation, in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined 
that all aspects of the test cloth specifications can be harmonized 
between clothes washers and clothes dryers (i.e., not just the pre-
conditioning requirements). Id. at 89 FR 87814.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to harmonize test cloth 
specifications between appendices J, J2, D1, and D2 by replacing 
existing test cloth specifications in appendices D1 and D2 with 
references to the analogous specifications in appendix J3. Id.
    Specifically, DOE proposed to replace the entirety of section 2.6 
in both appendices D1 and D2 with a paragraph specifically referencing 
sections 3 (Test Cloth Specifications) and 7 (Test Cloth Material 
Verification Procedure) of appendix J3. DOE also proposed to update 
section 2.7 of appendices J and J2 to specifically reference sections 3 
(Test Cloth Specifications), 7 (Test Cloth Material Verification 
Procedure), and 8 (RMC Correction Curve Procedure) of appendix J3. Id.
    DOE further proposed to remove section 3.8 of appendix J3, which 
currently specifies that the test cloth must be clean, may not be used 
for more than 60 clothes washer runs, must be permanently marked, and 
may not be used in mixed lots. Id. DOE proposed that these 
specifications--which are specific to clothes washers and do not apply 
to clothes dryers--be included in section 2.7 of appendices J and J2. 
Id. DOE also proposed that appendices D1 and D2 retain the existing 
requirement that for clothes dryers the test cloth must not be used for 
more than 25 runs, although this requirement will be relocated to 
section 2.6 (from 2.6.1(c) currently). Id.
    Finally, DOE proposed to update the objective statement and section 
5 of appendix J3 to explicitly reference

[[Page 5532]]

clothes dryers alongside clothes washers. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to 
harmonize test cloth specifications for clothes washers and clothes 
dryers. Id.
    AHAM commented that it supports DOE's proposal in the November 2024 
NOPR to harmonize test cloth specifications for clothes washers and 
clothes dryers. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 1)
    Ravnitzky commented in support of harmonizing the test cloth 
specifications between clothes washers and clothes dryers to simplify 
compliance, enhance the consistency of test results, reduce complexity 
for manufacturers, and support standardized testing practices. 
(Ravnitzky, No. 5 at p. 1)
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 
2024 NOPR, to harmonize test cloth specifications for clothes washers 
and clothes dryers.
4. Restructuring Appendix J3
    Section 3.2 of appendix J3 specifies the ``nominal fabric type'' 
for the test cloth as pure finished bleached cloth made with a momie or 
granite weave, which is nominally 50 percent cotton and 50 percent 
polyester. Section 3.5 of appendix J3 contains a duplicative (although 
more specific) requirement specifying a fiber content of 50 percent 
 4 percent cotton, with the balance being polyester. In the 
November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to remove the less-specific nominal 
fiber content specification from section 3.2 of appendix J3. 89 FR 
87803, 87814. Accordingly, DOE further proposed to update the name of 
section 3.2 of appendix J3 from ``nominal fabric type'' to ``fabric 
type.'' Id.
    Within section 3 of appendix J3, which lists the specifications for 
the test cloth, subsections 3.2 through 3.5 are currently organized as 
follows: section 3.2 specifies the nominal fabric type, section 3.3 
specifies the fabric weight, section 3.4 specifies the thread count, 
and section 3.5 specifies the fiber content of the yarn. This order 
does not match the order in which these material properties are 
considered throughout the test cloth fabrication process. Specifically, 
the weaving process starts with spinning yarn of a specific fiber 
content, then a specific number of yarn strands (corresponding to 
thread count) are woven into a roll of fabric, resulting in a specific 
material density (i.e., fabric weight). To better match the order in 
which these material properties are considered throughout the test 
cloth fabrication process, DOE proposed in the November 2024 NOPR to 
reorder these subsections to provide the fiber content specification 
first, followed by thread count specification, followed by the fabric 
weight specification. Id.
    Section 3.7 of appendix J3 currently includes dimensions for the 
energy test cloth and energy stuffer cloth \47\ and specifies that the 
dimensions apply ``before washing.'' DOE is aware that this terminology 
may lead to confusion, as it is inconsistent with other parts of the 
test procedure that use the term ``pre-conditioning'' rather than 
``washing'' to refer to the process by which test cloth is washed 
before its first use. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed, 
consistent with the recommendations in the May 2023 AHAM Letter, to 
clarify this wording and to specify that the dimensions listed in 
section 3.7 apply before pre-conditioning of the test cloth. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ An energy stuffer cloth is made from the same material as 
an energy test cloth but is cut to a smaller size. Test loads must 
consist of energy test cloths and no more than five energy stuffer 
cloths per load to achieve the specified weight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Appendices D1, D2, J, J2, and J3 currently use inconsistent 
hyphenation of the word pre-conditioning, using ``pre-conditioning'' in 
some cases and ``preconditioning'' in others. The May 2024 AHAM Letter 
requested that DOE standardize the hyphenation of ``pre-conditioning'' 
throughout the appendix. Id. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to 
standardize the hyphenation of ``pre-conditioning'' across all five 
appendices. Id.
    The June 2022 Final Rule re-numbered certain sections of appendix 
J3 and implemented in section 8.5 of appendix J3 references to 
``sections 8.3.3 and 8.3.4 of this appendix.'' 87 FR 33316, 33405. 
These cross-references should instead reference sections 8.3 and 8.4 of 
appendix J3. In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE proposed to correct this 
typographical error by updating section 8.5 of appendix J3 to correctly 
reference sections 8.3 and 8.4, in place of sections 8.3.3 and 8.3.4. 
89 FR 87803, 87814.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested feedback on its proposal 
to clarify and restructure appendix J3. Id.
    Ravnitzky commented that the proposed reorganization of the test 
procedures for improved readability and simplicity is a significant 
improvement, stating that clearer procedural instructions make it 
easier for manufacturers and testing laboratories to accurately follow 
the guidelines, enhancing overall compliance, and that simplifying the 
test procedures helps manufacturers to meet important energy efficiency 
requirements for major appliances such as clothes washers and clothes 
dryers, supporting broader energy conservation goals. (Ravnitzky, No. 5 
at p. 1)
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 
2024 NOPR, to clarify and restructure appendix J3.

E. Test Procedure Costs

    EPCA requires that test procedures amended by DOE not be unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 6314(a)(2)) DOE does not 
anticipate that the amendments in this final rule will impact testing 
costs or the burden of conducting the test procedure.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE presented market research indicating 
that the alternate test cloth proposed for use has approximately the 
same cost per pound as the current test cloth--approximately $40-50 per 
pound of unconditioned test cloth.\48\ 89 FR 87803, 87814. Therefore, 
DOE tentatively determined that using the alternate test cloth would 
not impact clothes washer or clothes dryer testing costs. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ These cost estimates are based on DOE's most recent 
purchases of test cloth in relatively small quantities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on an analysis of the test results presented in the Technical 
Appendix, in the November 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that 
manufacturers would be able to rely on data generated under the current 
test procedures for the newly finalized amendments. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its tentative 
determination that that the amendments proposed in this NOPR would not 
impact testing costs or the burden of conducting the test procedure. 
Id.
    DOE received no comments in response to the November 2024 NOPR 
regarding the impact of testing costs or the burden of conducting the 
test procedure.
    For the reasons discussed in this final rule and in the November 
2024 NOPR, DOE has determined that the amendments adopted in this final 
rule will not impact testing costs or the burden of conducting the test 
procedure.

F. 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

[[Page 5533]]

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); 42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) 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); 42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2)) 
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.)
    As discussed, on September 28, 2023, DOE issued a statement stating 
that DOE would exercise its enforcement discretion and not impose civil 
penalties on a clothes washer, commercial clothes washer, or clothes 
dryer manufacturer for certifying compliance with DOE's energy 
conservation standards based on testing that exceeds the maximum test 
cloth run provision set forth in the DOE test procedures. Instead, DOE 
allowed for usage of test cloth for twice the number of runs allowed in 
the relevant test procedures.
    In the May 2024 AHAM Letter, AHAM requested that DOE maintain its 
enforcement discretion policy to allow twice the number of test runs 
than is currently specified for test cloth meeting the current 
specifications, but not for any of the alternate test cloth, noting 
that it did not have any test data to support an extended number of 
cycles on the new test cloth at the time. 89 FR 87803, 87815.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that the 
updated test cloth provisions would alleviate any test cloth shortages 
that were the impetus for the enforcement discretion policy, and that 
at the time of compliance of the amended test procedure, no need for 
such a policy would remain. Id. Therefore, in the November 2024 NOPR, 
DOE tentatively determined that upon the compliance date of test 
procedure provisions of an amended test procedure (i.e., 180 days after 
publication of a test procedure final rule), the enforcement discretion 
policy would be withdrawn. Id.
    In the May 2024 AHAM Letter, AHAM further requested that DOE 
consider allowing immediate use of the alternate test cloth as a relief 
to manufacturers facing test cloth shortages, rather than waiting for 
the completion of the rulemaking. Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE recognized the concern of test cloth 
availability. Id. As noted, DOE tentatively determined that it would 
maintain the current enforcement policy allowing for the extended 
lifetime of the current test cloth until 180 days after publication of 
a test procedure final rule and noted that the amendments could be used 
as early as their effective date (i.e., 30 days after publication of 
the final rule DOE published regarding these amendments). Id.
    In the November 2024 NOPR, DOE requested comments on its tentative 
determination that the enforcement discretion policy allowing twice the 
number of test cloth runs would be withdrawn 180 days after publication 
of a test procedure final rule. Id.
    DOE did not receive any specific comments on this topic and is 
finalizing its proposal, consistent with the November 2024 NOPR, that 
the enforcement discretion policy allowing twice the number of test 
cloth runs will be withdrawn 180 days after publication of this final 
rule.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

    Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review,'' as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ``Improving 
Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and E.O. 
14094, ``Modernizing Regulatory Review,'' 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023), 
requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to: (1) propose or 
adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits 
justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are 
difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the least 
burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives, 
taking into account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, 
the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in choosing among 
alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net 
benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health 
and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity); 
(4) to the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than 
specifying the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities 
must adopt; and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to 
direct regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage 
the desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or 
providing information upon which choices can be made by the public. DOE 
emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its guidance, the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (``OIRA'') in the Office 
of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has emphasized that such techniques 
may include identifying changing future compliance costs that might 
result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes. 
For the reasons stated in the preamble, this final regulatory action is 
consistent with these principles.
    Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit 
``significant regulatory actions'' to OIRA for review. OIRA has 
determined that this final regulatory action does not constitute a 
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. 
Accordingly, this action was not submitted to OIRA for review under 
E.O. 12866.

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: www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE reviewed this final rule under the 
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and 
policies published on February 19, 2003.
    DOE has recently conducted a focused inquiry into small business 
manufacturers of the RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers covered by 
this rulemaking. DOE used available public information to identify 
potential small manufacturers. DOE accessed the

[[Page 5534]]

Compliance Certification Database \49\ to create a list of companies 
that import or otherwise manufacture the RCWs, CCWs, and consumer 
clothes dryers covered by this final rule. Of the domestic original 
equipment manufacturers (``OEM'') that manufacture the RCWs, CCWs, and 
consumer clothes dryers covered by this final rule, DOE has identified 
one domestic RCW OEM that qualifies as a small business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification 
Database, available at: www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/products.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As detailed in section III.C.4 of this document, DOE is 
establishing an additional type of test cloth be permitted for testing. 
This alternate test cloth (and updated test cloth provisions) will 
alleviate any test cloth shortages currently experienced by 
manufacturers. This alternate test cloth is approximately the same cost 
as the existing test cloth and has not demonstrated any substantive 
differences in measured efficiency compared with historical lots used 
to RCW and consumer clothes dryer testing. As a result, DOE does not 
expect any increased cost or burdens to manufacturers from this final 
rule.
    Therefore, DOE concludes that the 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 RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers 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 RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers. (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 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.
    DOE is not amending the certification or reporting requirements for 
RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers in this final rule.
    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 for 
measuring the energy efficiency of RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes 
dryers. DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class of actions 
that are categorically excluded from review under the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE's 
implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, 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 (February 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

[[Page 5535]]

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 www.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 proposed rule or policy that may affect 
family well-being. When developing a Family Policymaking Assessment, 
agencies must assess whether: (1) the action strengthens or erodes the 
stability or safety of the family and, particularly, the marital 
commitment; (2) the action strengthens or erodes the authority and 
rights of parents in the education, nurture, and supervision of their 
children; (3) the action helps the family perform its functions, or 
substitutes governmental activity for the function; (4) the action 
increases or decreases disposable income or poverty of families and 
children; (5) the benefits of the action justify the financial impact 
on the family; (6) the action may be carried out by State or local 
government or by the family; and whether (7) the action establishes an 
implicit or explicit policy concerning the relationship between the 
behavior and personal responsibility of youth, and the norms of 
society. In evaluating the above factors, DOE has concluded that it is 
not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment as none of 
the above factors are implicated. Further, this determination would not 
have any financial impact on families nor any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution.

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 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%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%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 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 is likely to have a 
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of 
energy; or (2) 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 modifications to the test procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and 
consumer clothes dryers adopted in this final rule do not incorporate 
any new commercial standards or test procedures that are not already 
incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 430.3 and therefore DOE has not re-
assessed such standards as part of this final rule.

M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

    AATCC Test Method 135-2010 is referenced in the amendatory text of 
this document but has already been approved for the sections where it 
appears. No changes are being made to the IBR material.

N. 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).

[[Page 5536]]

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 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small 
businesses.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on January 10, 
2025, by Jeffrey Marootian, 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 January 13, 2025.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 430 of 
Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
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.

0
2. Amend appendix D1 to subpart B of part 430 by:
0
a. Revising sections 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, and 2.6.3;
0
b. Adding sections 2.6.4 and 2.6.5; and
0
c. Revising the heading for section 2.8.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix D1 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers

* * * * *

2. Testing Conditions

* * * * *
    2.6 Test cloths.
    2.6.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy 
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the 
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
    2.6.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to 
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material 
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to 
this subpart.
    2.6.3 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean 
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material. 
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes dryer.
    2.6.4 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned 
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this 
subpart.
    2.6.5 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for 
more than 25 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *
    2.8 Clothes dryer pre-conditioning.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend appendix D2 to subpart B of part 430 by:
0
a. Revising sections 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, and 2.6.3;
0
b. Adding sections 2.6.4 and 2.6.5; and
0
c. Revising the heading for section 2.8.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix D2 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers

* * * * *

2. Testing Conditions

* * * * *
    2.6 Test cloths.
    2.6.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy 
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the 
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
    2.6.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to 
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material 
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to 
this subpart.
    2.6.3 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean 
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material. 
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes dryer.
    2.6.4 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned 
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this 
subpart.
    2.6.5 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for 
more than 25 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *
    2.8 Clothes dryer pre-conditioning.
* * * * *

0
4. Amend appendix J to subpart B of part 430 by revising section 2.7 to 
read as follows:

Appendix J to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Automatic and Semi-Automatic Clothes Washers

* * * * *

2. Testing Conditions and Instrumentation

* * * * *
    2.7 Test cloths.
    2.7.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy 
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the 
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
    2.7.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to 
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material 
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to 
this subpart.
    2.7.3 RMC Correction Curve. The test cloth lot used for testing 
must have a remaining moisture content (RMC) correction curve 
determined, according to section 8 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
    2.7.4 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean 
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material. 
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes 
washer.
    2.7.5 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned 
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this 
subpart.
    2.7.6 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for 
more than 60 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *

0
5. Amend appendix J2 to subpart B of part 430 by revising section 2.7 
to read as follows:

Appendix J2 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Automatic and Semi-Automatic Clothes Washers

* * * * *

2. Testing Conditions and Instrumentation

* * * * *
    2.7 Test cloths.
    2.7.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy 
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the 
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
    2.7.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to 
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material 
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to 
this subpart.
    2.7.3 RMC Correction Curve. The test cloth lot used for testing 
must have a remaining moisture content (RMC) correction curve 
determined, according to section 8 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
    2.7.4 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean 
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material. 
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes 
washer.

[[Page 5537]]

    2.7.5 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned 
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this 
subpart.
    2.7.6 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for 
more than 60 test runs (after pre-conditioning).

0
6. Amend appendix J3 to subpart B of part 430 by:
0
a. Revising the heading for appendix J3;
0
b. Revising section 1;
0
c. Revising section 3;
0
d. Revising section 5;
0
e. Revising sections 7.1.1 and 7.2.5;
0
f. Revising sections 8.5 through 8.8; and
0
g. Adding section 8.9.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix J3 to Subpart B of Part 430--Test Cloth Specifications and 
Procedures for Pre-Conditioning and Determining Correction Coefficients 
of New Test Cloth Lots

* * * * *

1. Objective

    This appendix includes the following: (1) Specifications for the 
test cloth to be used for testing clothes washers and clothes 
dryers; (2) procedures for pre-conditioning the test cloth for use 
in testing clothes washers and clothes dryers; (3) procedures for 
verifying that new lots of test cloth meet the defined material 
specifications; and (4) procedures for developing a set of 
correction coefficients that correlate the measured remaining 
moisture content (RMC) values of each new test cloth lot with a set 
of standard RMC values established as an historical reference point. 
These correction coefficients are applied to the RMC measurements 
performed during testing according to appendix J or appendix J2 to 
this subpart, ensuring that the final corrected RMC measurement for 
a clothes washer remains independent of the test cloth lot used for 
testing.
* * * * *

3. Test Cloth Specifications

    The energy test cloths and energy stuffer cloths must meet the 
following specifications:
    3.1 The test cloth material must be one of the following two 
types:
    3.1.1 Legacy Momie Cloth. Test cloth meeting all of the 
specifications in sections 3.1.1.1 through 3.1.1.4 of this appendix.
    3.1.1.1 Fabric type. Pure finished bleached cloth made with a 
momie, granite, or crepe weave.
    3.1.1.2 Fiber content of warp and filling yarn. 50%  
4% cotton, with the balance being polyester, open end spun, 15/1 
 5% cotton count blended yarn.
    3.1.1.3 Thread count. 65 x 57 per inch (warp x fill),  2%. Thread count is measured on the finished good, prior to 
pre-conditioning.
    3.1.1.4 Fabric weight. 5.60  0.25 ounces per square 
yard (190.0  8.4 g/m\2\). Fabric weight is measured on 
the finished good, prior to pre-conditioning.
    3.1.2 Modified AATCC Laundering Ballast Type 3. Test cloth 
meeting the specifications in sections 3.1.2.1 through 3.1.2.4 of 
this appendix.
    3.1.2.1 Fabric Type. Plain weave.
    3.1.2.2 Fiber content of warp and filling yarn. 50% cotton/50% 
polyester  3%, 16/1 ring spun.
    3.1.2.3 Thread count. 52 x 48  5 yarns per inch. 
Thread count is measured on the finished good, prior to pre-
conditioning.
    3.1.2.4 Fabric weight. 4.57  0.29 ounces per square 
yard (155  10 g/m\2\). Fabric weight is measured on the 
finished good, prior to pre-conditioning.
    3.2 Water repellent finishes, such as fluoropolymer stain 
resistant finishes, must not be applied to the test cloth.
    3.3. Test cloth dimensions.
    3.3.1 Energy test cloth. The energy test cloth must be made from 
test cloth material that is cut to 24  \1/2\ inches by 
36  \1/2\ inches (61.0  1.3 cm by 91.4 
 1.3 cm), and hemmed to 22  \1/2\ inches by 
34  \1/2\ inches (55.9  1.3 cm by 86.4 
 1.3 cm) before pre-conditioning.
    3.3.2 Energy stuffer cloth. The energy stuffer cloth must be 
made from the same test cloth material as the energy test cloth, cut 
to 12  \1/4\ inches by 12  \1/4\ inches 
(30.5  0.6 cm by 30.5  0.6 cm), and hemmed 
to 10  \1/4\ inches by 10  \1/4\ inches 
(25.4  0.6 cm by 25.4  0.6 cm) before pre-
conditioning.
* * * * *

5. Test Cloth Pre-Conditioning Instructions

    Use the following instructions for performing pre-conditioning 
of new energy test cloths and energy stuffer cloths as specified 
throughout section 7 and section 8 of this appendix, before any 
clothes washer testing using appendix J or appendix J2 to this 
subpart, and before any clothes dryer testing using appendix D1 or 
appendix D2 to this subpart.
    5.1 Perform five complete wash-rinse-spin cycles, the first two 
with current AHAM Standard detergent Formula 3 and the last three 
without detergent. Place the test cloth in a clothes washer set at 
the maximum water level. Wash the load for ten minutes in soft water 
(17 ppm hardness or less) using 27.0 grams + 4.0 grams per pound of 
cloth load of AHAM Standard detergent Formula 3. The wash 
temperature is to be controlled to 135 [deg]F  5 [deg]F 
(57.2 [deg]C  2.8 [deg]C) and the rinse temperature is 
to be controlled to 60 [deg]F  5 [deg]F (15.6 [deg]C 
 2.8 [deg]C).
    5.2 Dry the load to bone-dry between each of the five wash-
rinse-spin cycles.
    5.3 The maximum shrinkage after pre-conditioning must not be 
more than 5 percent of the length and width. Measure per AATCC Test 
Method 135-2010 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3).
* * * * *

7. Test Cloth Material Verification Procedure

* * * * *
    7.1.1 Dimensions. Each hemmed energy test cloth must meet the 
size specifications in section 3.3.1 of this appendix. Each hemmed 
energy stuffer cloth must meet the size specifications in section 
3.3.2 of this appendix.
* * * * *
    7.2 Uniformity Verification.
* * * * *
    7.2.5 Calculate the coefficient of variation (CV) of the nine 
average RMC values from each sample load. For test cloth lots 
qualified after February 18, 2025, the CV must be less than or equal 
to 1.5% for the test cloth lot to be considered acceptable and to 
perform the standard extractor RMC testing.

8. RMC Correction Curve Procedure

* * * * *
    8.5 Repeat sections 8.3 and 8.4 of this appendix an additional 
two times, so that three replications at each extractor condition 
are performed. When this procedure is performed in its entirety, a 
total of 60 extractor RMC test runs are required.
    8.6 Calculate RMCcloth-avg for each extractor test 
condition by averaging the values of the 3 replications performed 
specified in sections 8.3 and 8.4 of this appendix.
    8.7 Perform a linear least-squares fit to determine coefficients 
A and B such that the standard RMC values shown in Table 8.7 of this 
appendix (RMCstandard) are linearly related to the 
RMCcloth-avg values calculated in section 8.6 of this 
appendix:

RMCstandard ~ A x RMCcloth-avg + B

where A and B are coefficients of the linear least-squares fit.

                                                             Table 8.7--Standard RMC Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                RMC percentage
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     ``g Force''                                          Warm soak                                         Cold soak
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       15 min. spin (percent)   4 min. spin (percent)    15 min. spin (percent)   4 min. spin (percent)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.................................................                     45.9                     49.9                     49.7                     52.8
200.................................................                     35.7                     40.4                     37.9                     43.1
350.................................................                     29.6                     33.1                     30.7                     35.8
500.................................................                     24.2                     28.7                     25.5                     30.0

[[Page 5538]]

 
650.................................................                     23.0                     26.4                     24.1                     28.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8.8 Calculate the corrected RMC value for each extractor test 
condition, RMCcloth-corr as follows:

RMCcloth-corr = A x RMCcloth-avg + B

Where:

RMCcloth-avg = the average RMC value, as calculated in 
section 8.6 of this appendix for each extractor test condition, 
expressed as a decimal, and
A and B are the coefficients of the linear least squares fit as 
determined in section 8.7 of this appendix.

    8.9 Calculate the root mean square error of the linear fit, 
RMSE. For test cloth lots qualified after February 18, 2025, the 
RMSE must be less than or equal to 0.012 for the test cloth lot to 
be considered acceptable. The RMSE is calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17JA25.091

Where:

RMCstandard_i = the RMCstandard value in Table 
8.7 of this appendix for the ith extractor test condition, expressed 
as a decimal,
RMCcloth-corr_i = the corrected RMC value, as calculated 
in section 8.8 of this appendix for the ith extractor test 
condition, expressed as a decimal, and
N = the number of extractor test conditions listed in Table 8.7 of 
this appendix = 20.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-00986 Filed 1-16-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```