[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32351-32365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11438]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2019-BT-TP-0021]
RIN 1904-AE75


Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Faucets and 
Showerheads

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and announcement of public 
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') proposes to amend the 
test procedures for faucets and showerheads to incorporate the current 
version of the referenced industry standard, American Society of 
Mechanical Engineers Standard A112.18.1-2018, ``Plumbing Fixture 
Fittings.'' DOE also proposes to add definitions for low-pressure water 
dispensers and pot fillers, and exclude them from the faucet 
definition. Finally, DOE proposes to provide further detail for 
conducting the flow rate measurement. DOE is seeking comment from 
interested parties on the proposal.

DATES: 
    Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on Wednesday, June 22, 2022, from 
1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' for 
webinar registration information, participant instructions, and 
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.
    Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding 
this proposal no later than August 1, 2022. See section V, ``Public 
Participation,'' for details.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons 
may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2019-BT-TP-0021, 
by any of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Email: to FaucetShowerhead2019TP0021. Include docket number 
EERE-2019-BT-TP-0021 in the subject line of the message.
    3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc 
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards 
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza SW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case 
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section V of this document.
    Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public 
meeting attendee lists and transcripts (if a public meeting is held), 
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for 
review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed 
in the www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the 
index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public 
disclosure, may not be publicly available.
    The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2019-BT-TP-0021. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to access all documents, including public

[[Page 32352]]

comments, in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit 
comments through www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Bryan Berringer, 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) 586-0371. Email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f9b88989959098979a9caa8d98979d988b9d8aa88c9c8a8d9096978ab99c9cd79d969cd79e968f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="beffceced2d7dfd0dddbedcadfd0dadfccdacdefcbdbcdcad7d1d0cdfedbdb90dad1db90d9d1c8">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Ms. Amelia Whiting, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2588. Email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#40012d252c29216e17282934292e270028316e242f256e272f36"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="edac808881848cc3ba85849984838aad859cc3898288c38a829b">[email protected]</span></a>.
    For further information on how to submit a comment, review other 
public comments and the docket, or participate in a public meeting (if 
one is held), contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program 
staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#24655454484d454a47417750454a404556405775514157504d4b4a576441410a404b410a434b52"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="377647475b5e5659545264435659535645534466425244435e5859447752521953585219505841">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the 
following industry standard into 10 CFR part 430:
    American Society of Mechanical Engineers (``ASME'') A112.18.1/
Canadian Standards Association (``CSA'') B125.1-2018 (with 10/18 
Errata), ``Plumbing Supply Fittings,'' approved 2018 (``ASME A112.18.1-
2018'').
    Copies of ASME A112.18.1-2018 can be obtained from American Society 
of Mechanical Engineers at Two Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, or 
by going to www.asme.org.
    For a further discussion of this standard, see section IV.M of this 
document.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. Authority
    B. Background
    C. Deviation From Appendix A
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
    A. Scope of Applicability
    1. Faucets
    2. Showerheads
    B. Updates to Industry Standards
    C. Additional Direction in Conducting ASME A112.18.1-2018
    D. Flow Restrictor Retention Test Method
    E. Reporting
    F. Clarification to 10 CFR 430.23 and Appendix S
    G. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
    1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
    2. Harmonization with Industry Standards
    H. Compliance Date
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    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
V. Public Participation
    A. Participation in the Webinar
    B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution
    C. Conduct of the Webinar
    D. Submission of Comments
    E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

    Faucets and showerheads are included in the list of ``covered 
products'' for which DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy 
conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(15) and 
(16)) DOE's test procedures for faucets and showerheads are currently 
prescribed at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (``CFR''), 
Sec.  430.23 (s) and (t), respectively, and 10 CFR part 430 subpart B, 
appendix S (``appendix S''). DOE regulations codify the statutory 
standards for faucets and showerheads. 10 CFR 430.32(o) and (p). The 
following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish test procedures 
for faucets and showerheads and relevant background information 
regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures for these products.

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\ 
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy and water efficiency of a number 
of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA established the Energy Conservation 
Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles, which sets forth 
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy or water efficiency. 
These products include faucets and showerheads, the subject of this 
document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(15) and (16))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation 
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant 
provisions of EPCA specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), 
test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), 
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to 
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that 
manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1) 
Certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy 
conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), 
and (2) making other representations about the efficiency of those 
consumer products (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these 
test procedures to determine whether the products comply with relevant 
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
    Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products 
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations 
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 
U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for 
particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures 
and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for 
covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or 
amended under this section be reasonably designed to produce test 
results which measure energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual 
operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use 
cycle or period of use and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
    EPCA directs that the test procedures for faucets and showerheads 
are to be the test procedures specified in American Society of 
Mechanical Engineers (``ASME'') Standard A112.18.1M-1989, ``Plumbing 
Fixture

[[Page 32353]]

Fittings.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(7)(A)) EPCA further directs that, if the 
test procedure requirements of ASME A112.18.1M-1989 are revised at any 
time and approved by the American National Standards Institute 
(``ANSI''), DOE must amend the Federal test procedures to conform to 
the revised ASME standard, unless DOE determines by rule that to do so 
would not meet the requirements of EPCA that the test procedures be 
reasonably designed to produce test results which measure water use 
during a representative average use cycle as determined by DOE, and not 
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(7)(B); 42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(3))
    EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate 
test procedures for each type of covered product, including faucets and 
showerheads, to determine whether amended test procedures would more 
accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the test 
procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably 
designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use 
cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
    If the Secretary determines, on her own behalf or in response to a 
petition by any interested person, that a test procedure should be 
prescribed or amended, the Secretary shall promptly publish in the 
Federal Register proposed test procedures and afford interested persons 
an opportunity to present oral and written data, views, and arguments 
with respect to such procedures. The comment period on a proposed rule 
to amend a test procedure shall be at least 60 days and may not exceed 
270 days. In prescribing or amending a test procedure, the Secretary 
shall take into account such information as the Secretary determines 
relevant to such procedure, including technological developments 
relating to energy use or energy efficiency of the type (or class) of 
covered products involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) If DOE determines 
that test procedure revisions are not appropriate, DOE must publish its 
determination not to amend the test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(1)(A)(ii))
    DOE is publishing this NOPR in satisfaction of its statutory 
obligations. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A) and (7)(B))

B. Background

    DOE's existing test procedures for faucets and showerheads appear 
at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix S.
    DOE last amended the test procedures for faucets and showerheads on 
October 23, 2013 (``October 2013 Final Rule''). 78 FR 62970. In that 
final rule, DOE adopted through reference certain provisions of the 
2012 version of ASME A112.18.1 as part of the test procedures for 
faucets and showerheads. 78 FR 62970, 62982. Since then, the 2012 
version of the ASME standard was re-affirmed in 2017, and then updated 
in 2018 to ASME A112.18.1-2018, which is the current version of the 
industry standard.
    On September 2, 2021, DOE initiated an early assessment review of 
the showerhead and faucet test procedure through the publication of a 
request for information (``RFI''). 86 FR 49261 (``September 2021 
RFI''). DOE solicited public comments, data, and information on all 
aspects of, and any issues or problems with, the existing DOE test 
procedure, including whether the test procedure needs updates or 
revisions. On September 24, 2021, in response to a stakeholder 
request,\3\ DOE extended the comment period for an additional 15 days. 
86 FR 53013 (Sept. 24, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Comment EERE-2019-BT-TP-0021-0002 available at: 
www.regulations.gov/comment/EERE-2019-BT-TP-0021-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE received comments in response to the September 2021 RFI from 
the interested parties listed in Table I.I.

          Table I.I--List of Commenters with Written Submissions in Response to the September 2021 RFI
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Commenter(s)                     Reference in this NOPR                    Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Supply Association........  ASA..................................  Trade Organization.
Appliance Standards Awareness        Efficiency Advocates.................  Efficiency Organization.
 Project, Natural Resources Defense
 Council, Northwest Energy
 Efficiency Alliance.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company,    CA IOUs..............................  Utilities.
 Southern California Edison, San
 Diego Gas & Electric Company;
 collectively, the California
 Investor-Owned Utilities.
Plumbing Manufacturers               PMI..................................  Trade Organization.
 International.
Ziesenheim.........................  Ziesenheim...........................  Individual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or 
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop 
test procedures for faucets and showerheads. (Docket No. EERE-2019-
BT-TP-0021, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The 
references are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket 
ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Deviation From Appendix A

    In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 
appendix A (``Appendix A''), DOE notes that it is deviating from the 
provision in appendix A regarding the pre-NOPR stages for a test 
procedure rulemaking. Section 8(b) of appendix A states that if DOE 
determines that it is appropriate to continue the test procedure 
rulemaking after the early assessment process, it will provide further 
opportunities for early public input through Federal Register 
documents, including notices of data availability and/or RFIs. DOE is 
opting to deviate from this provision by publishing a NOPR following 
the early assessment review RFI because, as discussed previously, DOE 
requested comment on a number of specific topics in the September 2021 
RFI, and comments received in response to the September 2021 RFI 
informed the proposals included in this NOPR.

II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to:
    (1) Include definitions for low-pressure water dispensers and pot 
fillers;
    (2) Update the faucet definition by explicitly excluding low-
pressure water dispensers and pot fillers;
    (3) Incorporate by reference the latest revision to the applicable 
industry standard--ASME A112.18.1-2018, ``Plumbing Supply Fittings'' as 
it pertains to flow rate measurement; and
    (4) Add further direction for conducting the flow rate measurement.
    DOE's proposed actions are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the 
current test procedure as well as the reason for the proposed change.

[[Page 32354]]



  Table II.1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test Procedure Relative to
                         Current Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Proposed test
  Current DOE test procedure           procedure           Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not define low-pressure    Defines the terms low-  Clarifies scope
 water dispensers or pot         pressure water          of coverage.
 fillers.                        dispensers and pot
                                 fillers.
Does not explicitly exclude     Explicitly excludes     Clarifies scope
 low-pressure water dispensers   low-pressure water      of coverage.
 or pot fillers from the         dispensers and pot
 faucet definition.              fillers from the
                                 faucet definition.
Incorporates the 2012 version   Incorporates the 2018   Harmonize with
 of ASME A112.18.1 for           version of ASME         updated
 measurement of flow rate.       Standard A112.18.1.     industry
                                                         standard.
Aside from referencing ASME     Adds additional         Response to
 A112.18.1, includes limited     guidance, in            stakeholder
 guidance as to how to conduct   accordance with         comment;
 the flow measurement test       current industry        improve
 procedure.                      practices, to ensure    repeatability
                                 appropriate equipment   of test
                                 is being used and to    results.
                                 ensure repeatability
                                 of the industry
                                 standards in both the
                                 fluid meter and time/
                                 volume flow rate test
                                 methods.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments 
described in section III of this NOPR would not alter the measured flow 
rate of faucets and showerheads, or require retesting or 
recertification solely as a result of DOE's adoption of the proposed 
amendments to the test procedures, if made final. DOE has tentatively 
determined that the proposed amendments to the test procedure are 
reasonably designed to produce test results which measure energy 
efficiency, energy use, water use, or estimated annual operating costs 
during a representative average use cycle, as required by EPCA. 
Additionally, DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed 
amendments, if made final, would not increase the cost of testing. 
Discussion of DOE's proposed actions are addressed in detail in section 
III of this NOPR.

III. Discussion

    In the following sections, DOE proposes certain amendments to its 
test procedures for faucets and showerheads. For each proposed 
amendment, DOE provides relevant background information, explains why 
the amendment merits consideration, discusses relevant public comments, 
and proposes a potential approach.

A. Scope of Applicability

    This proposed rulemaking applies to faucets and showerheads, which 
are discussed in the following sections.
1. Faucets
    EPCA and DOE define ``faucet'' as a lavatory faucet, kitchen 
faucet, metering faucet, or replacement aerator for a lavatory or 
kitchen faucet. (42 U.S.C. 6291(31)(E); 10 CFR 430.2). In the September 
2021 RFI, DOE stated that it had identified products characterized in 
the market as ``low-pressure water dispensers'' and ``pot fillers,'' 
which appear to be within the scope of the statutory term ``faucet.'' 
86 FR 49261, 49263. DOE stated that it did not consider low-pressure 
water dispensers or pot fillers when establishing the current test 
procedure and standards for faucets. 86 FR 49261, 49264. Further, the 
purpose of these products is typically to fill a vessel and as such, 
the water usage associated with these products is directly related to 
the size of the vessel and is independent of the flow rate of these 
products. Id. at 86 FR 49263. As such, application of a maximum flow 
rate \5\ to these products would not save any water and could diminish 
the usefulness of such products by taking longer to fill a given 
vessel. Id. Therefore, DOE stated that although low-pressure water 
dispensers appear to meet the DOE definition of a faucet, there is 
currently no applicable DOE test procedure for testing low-pressure 
water dispensers or pot fillers because the DOE test procedure requires 
testing faucets at 60 psi whereas low-pressure water dispensers operate 
at 15 psi. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The DOE water conservation standard for faucets specifies 
that water use must be ``measured at a flowing water pressure of 60 
pounds per square inch [(`psi')].'' 10 CFR 430.32(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE received comments regarding low-pressure water dispensers and 
pot fillers.
    ASA explained that it agrees with DOE's understanding of the 
differences between ``low-pressure water dispensers'' and ``pot 
fillers'' compared to conventional kitchen faucets. These products are 
specifically intended and marketed by manufacturers for filling 
operations only and not for tasks associated with conventional kitchen 
faucets. (ASA, No. 6 at p.1) ASA asserted that nothing would be gained 
by regulating low-pressure water dispensers or pot fillers since the 
primary purpose is filling vessels, which is independent of flow rate. 
ASA stated that regulating such devices would have an undesirable 
effect of extending filling time for pot fillers. (ASA, No. 6 at p. 2)
    The Efficiency Advocates similarly commented that application of 
flow rate standards to low-pressure water dispensers and pot fillers 
would not yield water savings, since the volume of water used by such 
products would be determined by the volume of the vessel being filled. 
The Efficiency Advocates did not recommend establishing test procedures 
for low-pressure water dispensers and pot fillers. (Efficiency 
Advocates, No. 8 at p. 1) The Efficiency Advocates commented, however, 
that it is possible that pot fillers could be marketed for installation 
over a sink as a high-flow alternative to a covered kitchen faucet and 
recommended that DOE consider amending the definition of a kitchen 
faucet to encompass any terminal fitting designed for discharge into a 
kitchen sink at a water supply pressure of 20 psi or more. (Efficiency 
Advocates, No. 8 at p. 1)
    PMI agreed with DOE's understanding of the key differences between 
low-pressure water dispensers, pot fillers, and conventional kitchen 
faucets. PMI commented that test procedures should not be updated to 
include testing for low-pressure water dispensers or pot fillers given 
the function for those products and water conservation is not 
applicable to these products, as their intended use is for filling 
vessels with specific volumes of water, and that measuring the flow 
rate would not result in significant water savings. (PMI, No. 5 at p. 
2-4)
    Ziesenheim suggested that low-pressure water dispensers have the 
potential to conserve water, though in a slightly different capacity 
than traditional faucets, because the low pressure aspect of such water 
dispensers would allow for more precision in filling the vessel, which 
would decrease the likelihood of dispensing more water than needed. 
Ziesenheim recommended that DOE incorporate a definition of low-
pressure water dispensers into the Federal regulations for faucets and 
showerheads and use this definition to develop testing procedures and 
coverage

[[Page 32355]]

under energy conservation standards. (Ziesenheim, No. 3 at p. 1)
    Further, DOE received several comments regarding potential test 
procedures for both low-pressure water dispensers and pot fillers.
    PMI commented that the test procedures should not be updated to 
include testing for low-pressure water dispensers or pot fillers, given 
the functions of these products. (PMI, No. 5 at p. 3) PMI added that 
low-pressure water dispensers are intended to operate at or around 15 
psi in the field, and that these products are tested for a maximum flow 
rate of 1.5 gpm at 15 psi, per the ASME A112.18.1-2018 requirements. 
PMI commented that manufacturers are already testing low-pressure water 
dispensers to ASME A112.18.1-2018 for certification purposes. (PMI, No. 
5 at p. 5)
    ASA stated that there may not be a typical water pressure for low-
pressure water dispensers--other than a maximum pressure of 15 psi-- 
because the ASME definition requires the pressure reducing valve that 
regulates the pressure to the dispenser to be 15 psi or less. ASA also 
commented that the dispenser is typically part of a system of which the 
inter-relationship between the dispensing system components is a design 
choice by a manufacturer. ASA stated that if the DOE test procedure is 
not consistent with the industry consensus standard, there would be 
anticipated additional costs associated with having to test to two 
different requirements for low-pressure water dispensers. (ASA, No. 6 
at p. 3)
    As characterized by DOE in the September 2021 RFI and consistent 
with comments, the purpose of low-pressure water dispensers and pot 
fillers is to fill a vessel with water (e.g., a glass or a cooking 
vessel). Given this function, the amount of water provided by such 
products during consumer use would be dependent on the volume of the 
vessel and independent of the flow rate of the product. Establishing 
conservation standards for such products in terms of a maximum flow 
rate in gallons per minute (``gpm'') would not result in any water 
savings because the volume of water provided by such products is 
dictated by the vessel to be filled as opposed to the flow rate. 
Furthermore, establishing conservation standards could diminish the 
usefulness of such products by increasing the amount of time required 
to fill a vessel with a particular volume of water. Further, a test 
procedure that would measure the flow rate of such products would not 
provide meaningful information to consumers related to water usage.
    Based on the foregoing, DOE has tentatively determined that that 
low-pressure water dispensers and pot fillers are not within the 
definition of ``faucet'' for the purposed of Part A of EPCA. 
Accordingly, DOE is proposing to amend the definition of ``faucet'' at 
10 CFR 430.2 to explicitly exclude low-pressure water dispensers and 
pot fillers. DOE proposes to define a faucet as ``a lavatory faucet, 
kitchen faucet, metering faucet, or replacement aerator, excluding low-
pressure water dispensers and pot fillers.''
    DOE requests comment on its proposed amendment to the definition of 
``faucet'' to explicitly exclude ``low-pressure water dispenses'' and 
``pot fillers.''
    DOE proposes to add a definition for low-pressure water dispensers 
in 10 CFR 430.2. ASME A112.18.1-2018 defines a low-pressure water 
dispenser as ``a terminal fitting located downstream of a pressure 
reducing valve that dispenses drinking hot water above 71 [deg]C (160 
[deg]F) or cold water or both at a pressure of 105 kPA (15 psi) or 
less.'' DOE notes that its authority generally applies to products as 
manufactured, not to the installation of products. (See generally 42 
U.S.C. 6302) Therefore, DOE is proposing to modify the ASME A112.18.1-
2018 definition to reference a product as manufactured, as opposed to 
its installation location. Additionally, DOE is proposing to exclude 
the drinking water temperature references. DOE has tentatively 
determined that the specified pressure is the relevant characteristic 
that would distinguish a low-pressure water dispenser from a faucet as 
defined for the purpose of applicability of the test procedure. 
Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define low-pressure water dispenser as 
``a terminal fitting that dispenses drinking water at a pressure of 105 
kPA (15 psi) or less.''
    DOE requests comment on proposing to adopt the ASME A112.18.1-2018 
definition for ``low-pressure water dispenser,'' with modification as 
described.
    DOE tries to identify physical features in its definitions that 
would allow a third-party to easily distinguish between products. DOE 
has stated that relying on a manufacturer's intent can reduce 
regulatory transparency, and creates challenges for enforcement. 87 FR 
13901, 13904. Due to these concerns with trying to interpret whether a 
product is designed to operate downstream of a pressure reducing valve 
or not, DOE is also considering including other physical features in 
the definition that would allow low-pressure water dispensers to be 
easily identified, absent any information from the manufacturer. Based 
on research of these products, DOE understands that low-pressure water 
dispensers tend to have smaller diameter fittings for water 
connections. DOE observed that low-pressure water dispensers have \1/
4\'' compression fittings, which is slightly smaller than the typical 
\3/8\'' compression fitting of a faucet.
    DOE requests comment as to any additional physical features that 
distinguish a low-pressure water dispenser from a faucet.
    DOE requests comment as to whether a \1/4\'' compression fitting 
could be universally identified as a universal characteristic of low-
pressure water dispensers that distinguishes it from faucets.
    Unlike ``low-pressure water dispenser,'' ASME A.112.18.1-2018 does 
not define pot filler. DOE notes the concern raised by the Efficiency 
Advocates that pot fillers could be installed over a kitchen sink. DOE 
assessed products marketed as residential pot fillers and observed 
several characteristics that make it unlikely for a pot filler to be 
installed for regular discharge into a kitchen sink.
    All the residential pot fillers DOE observed have an articulated 
arm. The reason pot fillers have an articulated arm is because it 
allows the pot filler to extend over a cooking surface, such as burners 
on a range, to fill pots. When not in use, the articulation allows the 
pot filler to be pushed flat against the wall and out of the way of the 
cooking surface. Further, DOE observed that pot fillers have two shut-
off valves, one located at or near the wall and the other located at or 
near the output of the pot filler. Given that pot-fillers are typically 
installed over locations that do not have a drain (i.e., over a stove), 
the two shut-off valves minimize the chance of accidentally turning on 
the pot filler when there is not a vessel underneath because an 
accidental bumping of one shut-off valve from the off to the on 
position does not turn on the pot filler. Lastly, DOE observed that pot 
fillers are designed for a single supply line (e.g., cold water), 
limiting their suitability for use as a kitchen faucet, which are 
generally supplied with both hot and cold water.
    Based on these identifying characteristics, DOE proposes to define 
pot filler in 10 CFR 430.2 as ``a terminal fitting with an articulated 
arm and two or more shut-off valves that can accommodate only a single 
supply water inlet.''
    DOE requests comments on the proposed definition of ``pot filler'' 
and whether other characteristics would

[[Page 32356]]

more appropriately distinguish pot fillers from faucets, as defined by 
EPCA and DOE.
2. Showerheads
    EPCA defines ``showerhead'' as ``any showerhead (including a 
handheld showerhead), except a safety shower showerhead.'' (42 U.S.C 
6291(31)(D))
    DOE also defines ``hand-held showerhead'' to mean a showerhead that 
can be held or fixed in place for the purpose of spraying water onto a 
bather and that is connected to a flexible hose. 10 CFR 430.2. ``Safety 
shower showerhead'' is defined as a showerhead designed to meet the 
requirements of International Equipment Safety association (``ISEA'') 
standard ISEA Z358.1, American National Standard for Emergency Eyewash 
and Shower Equipment.'' Id.
    On July 22, 2021, DOE issued a NOPR in which it proposed to 
reinstate the 2013 definition of ``showerhead'' by amending the 
regulatory definition of ``showerhead'' to mean ``a component or set of 
components distributed in commerce for attachment to a single supply 
fitting, for spraying water onto a bather, typically from an overhead 
position, excluding safety shower showerheads.'' 86 FR 38594, 38597, 
38607 (``July 2021 NOPR'').\6\ On December 20, 2021, DOE published a 
final rule that adopted the definition of ``showerhead'' as proposed in 
the July 2021 NOPR. 86 FR 71797 (``December 2021 Final Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ DOE also proposed to remove the regulatory definition of 
``body spray.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the September 2021 RFI, DOE requested comment on the 
definitional updates in ASME A112.18.1-2018 as it relates to 
showerheads. 86 FR 49261, 49264. Specifically, DOE discussed that ASME 
A112.18.1-2018 added new definitions for ``hand-held shower'' and 
``rain shower.'' Id. Regarding ``hand-held shower'' DOE stated the DOE 
definition is almost identical to the definition in the ASME industry 
standard, and therefore tentatively concluded that there is no reason 
to update this definition now. Id. Regarding ``rain shower,'' DOE noted 
that the new definition was added to ASME A112.18.1-2018 in light of 
the standard's new spray force requirements specific to rain showers. 
Id. However, DOE tentatively concluded that there is no reason to 
include the term and definition for rain shower because the DOE test 
procedure only measures maximum water consumption and not spray force. 
Id.
    PMI commented that it concurs with DOE's proposal from the July 
2021 NOPR to adopt the definition of showerhead that was effective in 
2013. (PMI, No. 5 at p. 6) ASA and PMI stated that DOE should complete 
the new showerheads definition rulemaking before taking any further 
action on showerheads. (ASA, No. 6 at p. 3; PMI, No. 5 at p. 6)) As 
explained previously, DOE has published a final rule adopting the 
proposed definition.
    Regarding a definition of ``rain shower,'' PMI commented that there 
is no reason to include the term and definition for rain shower because 
testing of flow rate for a rain shower would be the same as testing a 
showerhead. PMI stated that the ASME industry standard only added a 
definition for rain shower to address unique spray force requirements. 
(PMI, No. 5 at p. 4) PMI also commented that the current definitions 
are effective and new definitions are not necessary. (PMI, No. 5 at p. 
5) ASA commented that adding a definition for rain shower would not 
serve a purpose because the definition was added in the ASME industry 
standard to support a spray force test method, not flow rate. (ASA, No. 
6 at p. 2) Separately, Efficiency Advocates stated that they agree that 
there is no need to make any updates to the definition of ``hand-held 
showerhead'' nor to provide a separate definition for the term rain 
shower. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 8 at p. 3)
    For the reasons discussed by stakeholders in their public comments 
and by DOE in the September 2021 RFI, DOE is not proposing to amend the 
definition of ``hand-held showerhead'' and is not proposing to define 
``rain shower.''
    DOE also received several comments on body sprays. In response to 
the September 2021 RFI, CA IOUs recommended that DOE clarify that body 
sprays, regardless of orientation, are subject to regulatory coverage 
and that they must meet the same flow rate requirement as showerheads. 
The CA IOUs commented that the California Code of Regulations, Title 20 
Appliance Efficiency Regulations states that a showerhead is ``a device 
through which water is discharged for a shower bath and includes a body 
sprayer and handheld showerhead but does not include a safety 
showerhead.'' (CA IOUs, No. 7 at p. 1-2) The Efficiency Advocates 
commented that DOE should make clear that the products that DOE 
describes as ``body sprays'' are showerheads and must meet the 
showerhead definition. The Efficiency Advocates asserted that since 
products marketed as body sprays may just as easily be installed in an 
overhead position as in any other position, these products meet the 
statutory definition of showerhead, i.e., that ``showerheads'' spray 
water ``typically from an overhead position.'' Further, the Efficiency 
Advocates stated that the use of ``typically'' may leave ambiguity for 
products that spray from another position or from multiple positions, 
depending simply on installation. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 8 at p. 4)
    In the December 2021 Final Rule, DOE withdrew the definition for 
body spray.\7\ 86 FR 71797, 71806. DOE stated that the definition was 
inconsistent with the express purpose of EPCA to conserve water and 
does not best address the relationship between body sprays and 
showerheads. Id. at 86 FR 71799. Further, DOE stated that industry 
standards and the marketplace treat ``showerheads'' and ``body sprays'' 
similarly, with the only difference being in the installation location. 
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On December 16, 2020, DOE published a final rule that 
adopted a definition for ``body spray'' as ``a shower device for 
spraying water onto a bather from other than the overhead position. 
A body spray is not a showerhead.'' 85 FR 81341, 81359.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE notes that the regulatory definition of showerhead includes the 
provision ``typically from an overhead position.'' 10 CFR 430.2 Given 
the ``typically from an overhead position'' language in the definition, 
DOE cannot make a general statement that all body sprays are 
showerheads as some body sprays are installed exclusively at body 
height and exclusively spray horizontally (i.e., are not overhead). DOE 
has previously stated that when testing a shower tower (also known as 
``shower panel'') assemblies, which includes body sprays, the 
components that are typically overhead (i.e., the main showerhead and 
hand-held showerheads) are to be tested with the full flow diverted to 
those components only. In addition, where it is not possible to isolate 
the covered portion of the shower tower, DOE stated that all components 
are to be flowing at the maximum rate and the showerhead (which 
encompasses the component or set of components that are ``typically 
from an overhead position'') measured separately. 78 FR 62970, 62975. 
Consistent with this testing, the definition of ``showerhead'' only 
includes products that are ``typically from an overhead position.'' To 
the extent that a body spray meets the definition of ``showerhead,'' 
such product is subject to the 2.5 gpm standard regardless of the 
consumer installation orientation.

B. Updates to Industry Standards

    Appendix S currently references ASME A112.18.1-2012 for the flow 
rate

[[Page 32357]]

test method. In the September 2021 RFI, DOE discussed that ASME 
A112.18.1-2012 was updated to the 2018 version, and that the main 
updates included provisions to accommodate testing low-pressure water 
dispensers. 86 FR 49261, 49625. As discussed in section III.A.1 of this 
document, DOE is proposing to define low-pressure water dispensers and 
pot fillers, and explicitly exclude these from the faucets definition. 
Therefore, DOE is not proposing to establish test procedures for low-
pressure water dispensers and pot fillers.
    Regarding showerheads, DOE discussed in the September 2021 RFI that 
ASME A112.18.1-2018 does not contain any updates to the water 
consumption test method for showerheads. 86 FR 49261, 49265. ASA 
commented that no amendments are needed for the current DOE test 
procedure for showerheads. (ASA, No. 6 at p. 3) PMI stated that no 
changes to the existing test procedure for showerheads are needed, once 
the 2013 definition of showerhead is finalized, because the current 
test procedures adequately assess the flow rate of showerheads. (PMI, 
No. 5 at p. 6) The Efficiency Advocates asserted that the test 
procedures for faucets and showerheads would more accurately and fully 
produce results that measure water use, if DOE adopted modifications to 
some elements of the water consumption test in the revised standard. 
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 8 at p. 2) A discussion of this comment 
appears in the next section.
    In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to update the faucets and 
showerheads test procedure to reference the latest version of the 
industry standard, which is ASME A112.18.1-2018. As previously 
discussed, the updated standard does not include any amendments to the 
test procedures for faucets, as proposed to be defined by this NOPR, or 
for showerheads. DOE has tentatively determined that referencing the 
most recent version of ASME A112.18.1-2018 would not impact (1) the 
measured values of water use for faucets or showerheads under appendix 
S, (2) the representativeness of the results, or (3) the test burden.
    DOE requests comment on its proposal to incorporate by reference 
ASME A112.18.1-2018.

C. Additional Direction in Conducting ASME A112.18.1-2018

    As discussed, DOE's current test procedure for evaluating the flow 
rate of faucets and showerheads is at appendix S and references ASME 
A112.18-1-2012. Specifically, DOE adopts through reference ASME 
A112.18.1-2012 Sections 5.4 and 5.4.2.2 which specify two alternate 
methods for measuring the flow rate of showerhead and faucets. One 
method, described as the fluid meter test, relies on a fluid meter 
installed upstream of the showerhead or faucet for measuring the flow 
rate. The second method, described as the time/volume method, relies on 
a container placed downstream of the showerhead or faucet that collects 
the water output during a measured period of time. The flow rate 
calculation divides the volume of water collected by the duration of 
time.
    As discussed in section III.B of this document, DOE is proposing to 
incorporate by reference ASME A112.18.1-2018. The two methods for 
measuring flow rate in ASME A112.18.1-2018 are identical to those in 
ASME A112.18.1-2012.
    In response to the September 2021 RFI, the Efficiency Advocates 
asserted that ASME A112.18.1-2018 carries forth several deficiencies in 
both methods from early versions of the test procedure. (Efficiency 
Advocates, No. 8 at p. 2) Regarding testing of flow rate using the 
fluid meter test, the Efficiency Advocates commented that the industry 
test procedure lacks direction as to: (1) The type of meter acceptable 
for test; (2) the normal operating range of the fluid meter and it 
suitability to the target flow of the test; (3) a description of the 
meter's register, including incremental units of measurement; and (4) 
requirements for preconditioning of the meter before or between tests. 
Id.
    The Efficiency Advocates also commented that the industry test 
procedure for the time/volume test lacks direction as to: (1) The 
required dimensions of the receiving container; (2) any distance or 
orientation between the specimen and container to preclude the 
possibility of splashing water escaping; (3) the means of measuring the 
volume of water in the container or deriving the volume of water from 
the weight of the collected water; and (4) recording of elapsed time. 
Id. The Efficiency Advocates suggested that DOE supplement ASME 
A112.18.1-2018 with additional direction to ensure better accuracy, 
similar to DOE's previous instruction that any container in the time/
volume test be positioned to capture any leakage from the ball joint of 
the shower head. The Efficiency Advocates asserted that addressing 
these gaps is unlikely to render testing unduly burdensome, but would 
be likely to ensure greater standardization in test procedures and 
instill greater confidence in test results. (Id. at pp. 2-3) Further, 
the Efficiency Advocates commented that any inaccuracies would be 
amplified if standards are lowered and because some states with more 
stringent standards reference the DOE test procedure, the additional 
standardization is needed. (Id. at pp. 2-3)
    In response to similar comments received prior to the October 2013 
Final Rule, DOE determined that there was no evidence that the time/
volume test method in ASME A112.18.1 did not meet the statutory 
requirements at 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3) for DOE to prescribe test 
procedures that are reasonably designed to produce test results that 
measure water use during a representative average use cycle or period 
of use. 78 FR 62970, 62975.
    While DOE does not currently have any evidence that the current 
test procedure is resulting in inaccurate measurements of flow rates 
for faucets or showerheads, DOE is proposing additional detail to 
ensure that amendments to the test procedure would provide more 
accurate results.
    DOE conducted a thorough review of ASME A112.18.1-2018 and 
consulted two testing laboratories to identify common practices that 
DOE has tentatively determined address the concerns identified by the 
Efficiency Advocates without creating undue burden when testing. DOE 
also reviewed other similar test procedures, such as ASTM International 
(``ASTM'') F2324 ``Standard Test Method for Prerinse Spray Valves,'' 
which is currently incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 431.263 and 
referenced in 10 CFR 431.264 ``Uniform test method to measure flow rate 
and spray force of commercial prerinse spray valves.'' The ASTM F2324 
test method uses a time/volume test method to measure the flow rate of 
commercial prerinse spray valves.
    Regarding testing using the fluid meter test method in ASME 
A112.18.1-2018, DOE notes that many different types of acceptable fluid 
meters could be used. The consultation with the test laboratories 
suggested that there are several different types of fluid meters that 
they currently use, but so long as the fluid meter is rated for the 
product flow rate and has been calibrated, any fluid meter type is 
accurate. The test laboratories indicated further that the fluid meters 
they use are capable of measuring with a precision of a minimum of two 
significant figures.
    Based on what DOE has identified as current laboratory practice, 
DOE is proposing to add language to appendix S requiring that if the 
fluid meter test is used, the fluid meter must be rated for the flow 
rate range of the product being

[[Page 32358]]

tested. Further, DOE proposes that the fluid meter must be calibrated 
in accordance with manufacturer printed instructions and at the 
frequency specified in the manufacturer printed instructions. Finally, 
DOE proposes that the fluid meter must be capable of reporting flow 
rate to a resolution of no less than two significant figures.
    DOE requests comment on the proposed additional specifications for 
the fluid meter test and whether the proposed additional guidance is 
consistent with current industry practice.
    Regarding testing using the time/volume test method in ASME 
A112.18.1-2018, the test laboratories commented that they vary the type 
of receiving containers to ensure minimal water loss due to splashing. 
ASTM F2324 states that the receiving container should be a ``carboy, or 
equivalent container, for measuring the weight of the water during the 
flow rate test. A 5-gal (19-L) carboy water bottle has been found 
suitable (the carboy is the standard water bottle that is used for 
water coolers)'' and further adds ``Note: 1--The 5-gal (19-L) carboy 
container is the preferred container. With a narrow opening, the carboy 
captures all the water during the test at higher water pressure which 
can result in excess splashing.''
    A carboy may not be appropriate for testing of showerheads as the 
surface area of a showerhead is often larger than the carboy opening. 
However, instruction to address the potential for splashing would apply 
equally to the testing of showerheads. Reasonable efforts to control 
splashing would include use of a container with a narrower opening or a 
partial cover of the container.
    The test laboratories stated that the time/volume test is conducted 
for at least a minute, in accordance with Section 5.4.2.2 of ASME 
A112.18.1-2018, and that the timing is measured with a stopwatch with a 
resolution of 0.1 seconds. Once the time/volume test has concluded, 
test labs stated that they convert the mass of water to a volume based 
on the specific gravity of the water at the measured temperature.
    In accordance with existing practices, DOE is proposing to add 
language to appendix S requiring that if the time/volume test is used, 
the receiving container must be of sufficient size to contain all the 
water for a single test and have an opening size and/or a partial 
cover, such that loss of water from splashing is minimized. Further, 
DOE proposes to specify that the time/volume test is conducted for a 
minimum of one minute and that time is measured using a stopwatch with 
a minimum resolution of 0.1 seconds. DOE proposes to clarify that 
measuring and recording the temperature of the water in this type of 
test requires a thermocouple or similar device and only the following 
two approaches are permissible: (1) At the receiving container 
immediately after recording the mass of water, or (2) at the water in 
the supply line any time during the duration of the time/volume test. 
In addition, DOE proposes to require measuring the mass of water to at 
least two significant figures following the time/volume test and 
converting the mass to volume based on the specific gravity of water at 
the recorded temperature. As discussed, the proposed amendments 
providing additional specificity reflect an accurate method for 
measuring flow rate and reflect current testing practice, and therefore 
would not affect testing burden.
    DOE requests comment on the proposed additional specifications for 
the time/volume test method and whether there is any additional burden 
associated with the proposed additional specifications.
    DOE also requests comment on its determination that the proposed 
methods for measuring the temperature of water align with current 
industry practices for when conducting the time/volume test.

D. Flow Restrictor Retention Test Method

    The current standards for showerheads include a requirement that 
when used as a component of a showerhead, a flow-restricting insert 
must be mechanically retained at the point of manufacture such that a 
force of 8.0 pounds force (lbf) (36 Newtons) or more is required to 
remove the flow-restricting insert, except that this requirement does 
not apply to showerheads for which removal of the flow-restricting 
insert would cause water to leak significantly from areas other than 
the spray face. 10 CFR 430.32(p).
    In response to the September 2021 RFI, the Efficiency Advocates 
recommended that DOE propose a test method for flow restrictor 
retention to verify compliance with the flow restricting insert 
requirement. They stated that flow restrictors serve a critical 
function and asserted that their casual removal jeopardizes the 
effectiveness of the standard and its intended savings of energy and 
water. They stated that DOE considered this issue in 2012-2013, and 
developed a draft test of flow restrictor retention, but ultimately 
reached no conclusion and deferred the issue for a future date. 
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 8 and p. 3).
    As noted by the Efficiency Advocates, DOE considered a test method 
for flow restricting insert requirement during the previous rulemaking. 
DOE proposed a simplified gravity pull-style test method for 
verification of compliance with the requirements. 78 FR 20832, 20835-
20836 (Apr. 8, 2013). DOE based the proposal on tests that were 
conducted on 21 showerheads, which included a variety of brands and 
styles. The showerheads tested had disc inserts made of plastic or 
rubber.\8\ Id. In conjunction with the proposal, DOE also published a 
technical support document (``TSD'') that summarized the systematic 
assessment DOE performed to arrive at the proposed test method.\9\ On 
July 30, 2013, DOE held an additional public meeting to receive 
comments on DOE's proposed test to verify mechanical retention of a 
showerhead flow restrictor when subjected to 8 lbf. 78 FR 42719 (July 
17, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ These were the only types for which a test procedure may be 
appropriate. In general, DOE found four basic flow restrictor 
designs--(1) Plastic discs, (2) Rubber discs, (3) Permanent flow 
control and (4) Sealing gasket. DOE determined that the permanent 
flow control designs automatically met the design requirement 
because they did not contain a flow restrictor that could be removed 
(i.e., it was integral to the showerhead). There is no need to test 
showerheads that used a sealing gasket as the flow control mechanism 
were exempt from the design requirement because the removal of the 
flow-restrictor would cause water to leak significantly from areas 
other than the spray face. 78 FR 20832, 20836.
    \9\ Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking TSD: Energy 
Conservation Program Consumer Products and Certain Commercial and 
Industrial Equipment: Test Procedures for Showerheads, Faucets, 
Water Closets, Urinals, and Commercial Prerinse Spray Valves. 
Showerhead Flow Control Insert Retention Testing; 
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2011-BT-TP-0061-0033.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE received comments from stakeholders stating that: (1) There are 
thousands of showerhead geometries that require various methods to 
measure the 8 pound-force limit for flow restrictor removal (PMI, EERE-
2011-BT-TP-0061, No. 36 at p. 2); (2) there is not one method to test 
all inserts that that ANSI Recognized Certifying Bodies perform the 8 
pound-force test depending on the geometry of the faucet (PMI, EERE-
2011-BT-TP-0061, No. 36 at p. 4); (3) because a product would have to 
be tested in a specific manner, it would unavoidably hinder design 
flexibility (Moen, EERE-2011-BT-TP-0061, No. 30 at p. 2); (4) flow 
restrictor removal is not a widespread issue because most users are 
sufficiently satisfied with current showerhead performance (Moen, EERE-
2011-BT-TP-0061, No. 30 at p. 2); and (5) for the majority of users, 
removal of the

[[Page 32359]]

showerhead from the shower arm, including the identification and 
removal of the correct components, is a sufficient amount of work to 
deter them from altering their product (Moen, EERE-2011-BT-TP-0061, No. 
30 at p. 2). In October 2013 Final Rule and in consideration of 
comments received, DOE stated that further investigation of this issue 
was necessary to understand clearly any prospective impacts of the 
proposed test procedure prior to finalizing a test method, and did not 
finalize a test method. 78 FR 62970, 62974.
    The latest version of the industry standard, ASME A112.18.1-2018, 
continues not to include any test method for showerhead flow retention. 
DOE understands the main issue in developing a test method is that 
there are numerous flow restrictor configurations and there may not be 
one test method to suit all possible flow restrictors. For example, 
regarding a pull-style test method as previously considered by DOE, one 
commenter stated that many flow restrictors do not have sufficient 
surface area or protrusion onto which a clamp can be fastened for the 
test. (Kohler, EERE-2011-BT-TP-0061, No. 34 at p. 1) Given the 
variation in design, DOE tentatively continues to find that a test 
method may hinder product design. Moreover, DOE does not have any 
indication that there is an issue in practice with customers removing 
flow restriction devices. For the reasons discussed, DOE is not 
proposing a test method for flow restrictor retention.
    DOE requests comment and data on the prevalence of flow restrictors 
being removed from a showerhead by consumers.

E. Reporting

    Manufacturers, including importers, must use product-specific 
certification templates to certify compliance to DOE. For faucets and 
showerheads, the certification template reflects the general 
certification requirements specified at 10 CFR 429.12 and the product-
specific requirements specified at 10 CFR 429.28 and 10 CFR 429.29. DOE 
is not proposing to amend the product-specific certification 
requirements for these products.

F. Clarification to 10 CFR 430.23 and Appendix S

    10 CFR 430.23(s) and (t) provide the test procedures for the 
measurement of water consumption for faucets and showerheads, 
respectively. 10 CFR 430.23(s) requires that ``the maximum permissible 
water use allowed for lavatory faucets, lavatory replacement aerators, 
kitchen faucets, and kitchen replacement aerators, expressed in gallons 
and liters per minute (gpm and L/min), shall be measured in accordance 
to section 2(a) of appendix S of this subpart. The maximum permissible 
water use allowed for metering faucets, expressed in gallons and liters 
per cycle (gal/cycle and L/cycle), shall be measured in accordance to 
section 2(a) of appendix S of this subpart.'' Similarly, 10 CFR 
430.23(t) requires that ``the maximum permissible water use allowed for 
showerheads, expressed in gallons and liters per minute (gpm and L/
min), shall be measured in accordance to section 2(b) of appendix S of 
this subpart.'' The language ``maximum permissible water use'' in the 
aforementioned sections is incorrect, as the test procedures measure 
water use. The term ``maximum permissible water use'' is instead 
descriptive of a conservation standard. As such, DOE is proposing to 
replace the language ``the maximum permissible water use allowed'' in 
10 CFR 430.23(s) and 10 CFR 430.23(t) with ``the water use.'' This 
amendment would clarify that the DOE test procedures measure water use, 
whereas the standards in 10 CFR 430.32(s) and (t) establish the maximum 
allowable water use for water closets and urinals, respectively.
    DOE requests comment on the proposed updates for faucets and 
showerheads to replace ``maximum permissible water use allowed'' with 
``water use'' in 10 CFR 430.23(s) and (t), respectively.
    Similarly, 10 CFR 430.23(s), 10 CFR 430.23(t), and appendix S state 
that water use should be expressed in ``gallons and liters per minute 
(gpm and L/min).'' The proposed wording is unclear and could mply that 
manufacturers need to express results in both gpm and L/min. Instead, 
manufacturers should use appendix S for results expressed in gpm or L/
min. Manufacturers do not have to report both. As such, DOE is 
proposing to update language to state that water use is expressed in 
gallons or liters per minute.
    DOE requests comment on the proposed updates for faucets and 
showerheads to replace ``gallons and liters per minute'' with ``gallons 
or liters per minute.''

G. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization

1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to amend the existing test procedure for 
faucets and showerheads by updating references to the current industry 
standard, defining low-pressure water dispensers and pot fillers and 
explicitly excluding them from the definition of faucet, and specifying 
additional instruction for conducting the flow rate tests in ASME 
A112.18.1-2018 reflective of current testing laboratory practice. DOE 
has tentatively determined that these proposed amendments would not 
impact testing costs as discussed in the following paragraphs.
a. Update References to the Relevant Industry Standard
    DOE proposes to update references to the current version of the 
industry standard, ASME A112.18.1-2018. As stated in section III.B of 
this document, the main updates between ASME A112.18.1-2012, which is 
currently incorporated, and ASME A112.18.1-2018 accommodate low-
pressure water dispenser testing.
    DOE is proposing to exclude explicitly low-pressure water 
dispensers from the definition of faucet and therefore from the scope 
of the DOE test procedure for faucets. As such, DOE has tentatively 
determined that the updates to the industry standard would not affect 
testing of faucets or showerheads or the measured flow rates. 
Therefore, DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments 
would not affect the representations of faucet or showerhead water use. 
Based on this tentative determination, manufacturers would be able to 
rely on data generated under the current test procedure if DOE adopts 
the proposed amendments. As such, retesting of showerheads and faucets 
would not be required solely as a result of DOE's adoption of the 
proposed amendments to the test procedure.
    DOE requests comment on the impact and associated costs of the 
proposed amendment to incorporate by reference the latest version of 
the industry standard, ASME A112.18.1-2018.
b. New and Amended Definitions
    DOE proposes to define low-pressure water dispensers and pot 
fillers and amend the definition of faucets to explicitly exclude those 
products. These products were not previously considered within the 
scope of the faucet definition and the proposed amendments clarify the 
scope of the faucet definition. Accordingly, DOE has tentatively 
determined that the proposed definitions of low-pressure water 
dispensers and pot fillers and their explicit exclusion from the 
definition of faucet would not affect which products are currently 
subject to testing under the DOE test procedure.

[[Page 32360]]

    DOE requests comment on the impact and associated costs of the 
proposed amendment to define low-pressure water dispensers and pot 
fillers and to exclude them explicitly from the faucets definition.
c. Additional Direction in Conducting ASME A112.18.1
    In addition to the proposed adoption of the test provisions in ASME 
A112.18.1-2018, DOE proposes other clarifications to the test 
procedure, namely specification on equipment and instrumentation, 
measurement precision, and calculation of flow rate. As discussed, DOE 
has tentatively determined that the additional specifications reflect 
existing test laboratory practices. As such, DOE has tentatively 
determined that the proposed amendments would not affect the 
representations of faucet or showerhead water use. DOE has tentatively 
determined that manufacturers would be able to rely on data generated 
under the current test procedure if DOE adopts the proposed amendments. 
DOE does not expect retesting of faucets would be required solely as a 
result of DOE's adoption of the proposed amendments to the test 
procedure. Moreover, DOE has tentatively determined that the additional 
specifications would not impact the testing cost, as they would reflect 
current practice.
    DOE requests comment on the impact and associated costs of the 
proposed amendment to add clarifications about conducting testing under 
ASME A112.18.1-2018.
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
    DOE's established practice is to adopt relevant industry standards 
as DOE test procedures unless such methodology would fall short of 
EPCA's requirements that DOE's test procedure be unduly burdensome to 
conduct or would not produce test results that reflect the energy 
efficiency, energy use, water use or estimated operating costs of that 
product during a representative average use cycle or period of use. 
Section 8(c) of appendix A of 10 CFR part 430 subpart C. When the 
industry standard does not meet EPCA statutory criteria for test 
procedures, DOE will make modifications through the rulemaking process 
to these standards as the DOE test procedure.
    The test procedures for faucets and showerheads at appendix S adopt 
through reference the relevant provisions of ASME A112.18.1-2012. The 
provisions of the industry standard referenced in the Federal test 
procedure provide procedures for testing and measuring water 
consumption, specifications for test apparatus, and other general 
requirements. The industry standard DOE proposes to incorporate by 
reference via amendments described in this NOPR are discussed in 
further detail in section IV.M of this document.
    DOE requests comments on the benefits and burdens of the proposed 
updates and additions to industry standards referenced in the test 
procedure for faucets and showerheads.

H. Compliance Date

    EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all 
representations of energy efficiency and energy use, including those 
made on marketing materials and product labels, must be made in 
accordance with that amended test procedure, beginning 180 days after 
publication of such a test procedure final rule in the Federal 
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2))
    If DOE were to publish an amended test procedure EPCA provides an 
allowance for individual manufacturers to petition DOE for an extension 
of the 180-day period if the manufacturer may experience undue hardship 
in meeting the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) To receive such an 
extension, petitions must be filed with DOE no later than 60 days 
before the end of the 180-day period and must detail how the 
manufacturer will experience undue hardship. (Id.)

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    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), 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (``IRFA'') 
for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless 
the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small 
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE 
published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that 
the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly 
considered during the 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.
    The Small Business Administration (``SBA'') considers a business 
entity to be a small business, if, together with its affiliates, it 
employs less than a threshold number of workers or earns less than the 
average annual receipts specified in 13 CFR part 121. The threshold 
values set forth in these

[[Page 32361]]

regulation use size standards codes established by the North American 
Industry Classification System (``NAICS'') that are available at: 
www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards. Plumbing equipment 
manufacturers are classified under NAICS 332913 ``Plumbing Fixture 
Fitting and Trim Manufacturing,'' and NAICS 327110 ``Pottery, Ceramics, 
and Plumbing Fixture Manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 1,000 
employees or fewer for an entity to be considered a small business 
within these categories.
    As described in section III.G., DOE has tentatively concluded that 
none of the proposed test procedure amendments would result in 
increased costs to manufacturers. Accordingly, DOE initially concludes 
that the impacts of the proposed test procedure amendments proposed in 
this NOPR would not have a ``significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities,'' and that the preparation of an 
IRFA is not warranted. DOE will transmit the 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).
    DOE requests comment on its assessment that there would be no costs 
to small businesses as a result of the proposed test procedure 
amendments.

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Manufacturers of showerheads and faucets 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 
showerheads and faucets. (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 proposing to amend the certification or reporting 
requirements for showerheads and faucets in this NOPR. Instead, DOE may 
consider proposals to amend the certification requirements and 
reporting for showerheads and faucets under a separate rulemaking 
regarding appliance and equipment certification. DOE will address 
changes to OMB Control Number 1910-1400 at that time, as necessary.
    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 NOPR, DOE proposes test procedure amendments that it 
expects will be used to develop and implement future energy 
conservation standards for faucets and showerheads. DOE has determined 
that this proposed 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 (Aug. 4, 1999) 
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism 
implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the 
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would 
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess 
the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires 
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental 
consultation process it will follow in the development of such 
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has 
determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal 
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the 
products that are the subject of this proposed rule. States can 
petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and 
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further 
action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation 
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal 
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) 
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, (2) write regulations to 
minimize litigation, (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected 
conduct rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification 
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 
specifically requires that executive agencies make every reasonable 
effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the 
preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing 
Federal law or regulation, (3) provides a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction, 
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately defines 
key terms, and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity 
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney 
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires executive 
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in 
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is 
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the 
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, 
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 
12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``UMRA'') 
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal 
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the 
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). 
For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may 
cause the

[[Page 32362]]

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 proposed 
rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and determined that 
the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate 
that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, 
so these requirements do not apply.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family 
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. 
This proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

    DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation 
would not result in any takings that might require compensation under 
the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under 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 proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has 
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those 
guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB, 
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy 
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an 
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a 
final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a 
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, 
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on 
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, 
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected 
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
    The proposed regulatory action to amend the test procedure for 
measuring the water consumption of faucets and showerheads 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 proposed modifications to the test procedures for faucets and 
showerheads would incorporate testing methods contained in certain 
sections of the following commercial standards: ASME A112.18.1-2018. 
DOE has evaluated these standards and is unable to conclude whether 
they fully comply with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA 
(i.e., whether it was developed in a manner that fully provides for 
public participation, comment, and review.) DOE will consult with both 
the Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC concerning the impact 
of these test procedures on competition, prior to prescribing a final 
rule.

M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the test 
standard published by American Society of Mechanical Engineers 
(``ASME'') and the Canadian Standards Association (``CSA Group''), 
designated ASME A112.18.1-2018. ASME A112.18.1-2018 is an industry-
accepted test procedure that measures water consumption for faucets and 
showerheads, and is applicable to products sold in North America. The 
sections of ASME A112.18.1-2018 referenced are Section 5.4 ``Flow 
rate'' which includes Section 5.4.1 ``Supply fittings'' and Section 
5.4.2 ``Test procedure,'' which outline the procedures for testing and 
measuring water consumption, specifications for test apparatus, and 
other general requirements.
    Copies of ASME A112.18.1-2018 can be obtained from American Society 
of Mechanical Engineers at Two Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, or 
by going to www.asme.org.

[[Page 32363]]

V. Public Participation

A. Participation in the Webinar

    The time and date of the webinar meeting are listed in the DATES 
section at the beginning of this document. Webinar registration 
information, participant instructions, and information about the 
capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on 
DOE's websites: www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=40&action=viewcurrent and 
www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=2&action=viewlive. Participants are 
responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible with the webinar 
software.

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution

    Any person who has an interest in the topics addressed in this 
proposed rule, or who is representative of a group or class of persons 
that has an interest in these issues, may request an opportunity to 
make an oral presentation at the webinar. Such persons may submit to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ffbe8f8f93969e919c9aac8b9e919b9e8d9b8cae8a9a8c8b9690918cbf9a9ad19b909ad1989089"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="db9aababb7b2bab5b8be88afbab5bfbaa9bfa88aaebea8afb2b4b5a89bbebef5bfb4bef5bcb4ad">[email protected]</span></a>. Persons who wish to speak 
should include with their request a computer file in WordPerfect, 
Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format that briefly describes 
the nature of their interest in this proposed rulemaking and the topics 
they wish to discuss. Such persons should also provide a daytime 
telephone number where they can be reached.

C. Conduct of the Webinar

    DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the webinar/public 
meeting and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. 
The meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, 
but DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA (42 
U.S.C. 6306). A court reporter will be present to record the 
proceedings and prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the right to 
schedule the order of presentations and to establish the procedures 
governing the conduct of the webinar/public meeting. There shall not be 
discussion of proprietary information, costs or prices, market share, 
or other commercial matters regulated by U.S. anti-trust laws. After 
the webinar/public meeting and until the end of the comment period, 
interested parties may submit further comments on the proceedings and 
any aspect of the proposed rulemaking.
    The webinar will be conducted in an informal, conference style. DOE 
will present a general overview of the topics addressed in this 
proposed rulemaking, allow time for prepared general statements by 
participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views 
on issues affecting this proposed rulemaking. Each participant will be 
allowed to make a general statement (within time limits determined by 
DOE), before the discussion of specific topics. DOE will permit, as 
time permits, other participants to comment briefly on any general 
statements.
    At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit 
participants to clarify their statements briefly. Participants should 
be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants 
concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of 
participants concerning other matters relevant to this proposed 
rulemaking. The official conducting the webinar/public meeting will 
accept additional comments or questions from those attending, as time 
permits. The presiding official will announce any further procedural 
rules or modification of the above procedures that may be needed for 
the proper conduct of the webinar/public meeting.
    A transcript of the webinar will be included in the docket, which 
can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning of 
this document. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript 
from the transcribing reporter.

D. Submission of Comments

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
proposed rule no later than the date provided in the DATES section at 
the beginning of this proposed rule.\10\ Interested parties may submit 
comments using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section at 
the beginning of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ DOE has historically provided a 75-day comment period for 
test procedure NOPRs pursuant to the North American Free Trade 
Agreement, U.S.-Canada-Mexico (``NAFTA''), Dec. 17, 1992, 32 I.L.M. 
289 (1993); the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation 
Act, Public Law 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057 (1993) (codified as amended 
at 10 U.S.C.A. 2576) (1993) (``NAFTA Implementation Act''); and 
Executive Order 12889, ``Implementation of the North American Free 
Trade Agreement,'' 58 FR 69681 (Dec. 30, 1993). However, on July 1, 
2020, the Agreement between the United States of America, the United 
Mexican States, and the United Canadian States (``USMCA''), Nov. 30, 
2018, 134 Stat. 11 (i.e., the successor to NAFTA), went into effect, 
and Congress's action in replacing NAFTA through the USMCA 
Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. 4501 et seq. (2020), implies the 
repeal of E.O. 12889 and its 75-day comment period requirement for 
technical regulations. Thus, the controlling laws are EPCA and the 
USMCA Implementation Act. Consistent with EPCA's public comment 
period requirements for consumer products, the USMCA only requires a 
minimum comment period of 60 days. Consequently, DOE now provides a 
60-day public comment period for test procedure NOPRs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The 
www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be 
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization 
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your 
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, 
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you 
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. 
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not 
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your 
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, 
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any 
documents submitted with the comments.
    Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which 
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and 
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as 
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'')). Comments submitted 
through www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received 
through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information 
submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential 
Business Information section.
    DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before 
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being 
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed 
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several 
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov 
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
    Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted

[[Page 32364]]

via email also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not 
want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not 
include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, 
provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first 
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing 
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it 
does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. No faxes will be accepted.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that 
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. 
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of 
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature 
of the author.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 
person submitting information that he or she believes to be 
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via 
email two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked 
confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, 
and one copy of the document marked non-confidential with the 
information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own 
determination about the confidential status of the information and 
treat it according to its determination.
    It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public 
docket, without change and as received, including any personal 
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be 
exempt from public disclosure).

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment

    Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE 
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of 
interested parties concerning the following issues:
    (1) DOE requests comment on its proposed amendment to the 
definition of ``faucet'' to explicitly exclude ``low-pressure water 
dispenses'' and ``pot fillers.''
    (2) DOE requests comment on proposing to adopt the ASME A112.18.1-
2018 definition for ``low-pressure water dispenser,'' with modification 
as described.
    (3) DOE requests comment as to any additional physical features 
that could be used to distinguish a low-pressure water dispenser from a 
faucet.
    (4) DOE requests comment as to whether a \1/4\'' compression 
fitting could be universally identified as a universal characteristic 
of low-pressure water dispensers that distinguishes it from faucets.
    (5) DOE requests comments on the proposed definition of ``pot 
filler'' and whether other characteristics would more appropriately 
distinguish pot fillers from faucets, as defined by EPCA and DOE.
    (6) DOE requests comment on its proposal to incorporate by 
reference ASME A112.18.1-2018.
    (7) DOE requests comment on the proposed additional specifications 
for the fluid meter test and whether the proposed additional guidance 
is consistent with current industry practice.
    (8) DOE requests comment on the proposed additional specifications 
for the time/volume test method and whether there is any additional 
burden associated with the proposed additional specifications.
    (9) DOE also requests comment on its determination that the 
proposed methods for measuring the temperature of water align with 
current industry practices for when conducting the time/volume test.
    (10) DOE requests comment and data on the prevalence of flow 
restrictors being removed from a showerhead by consumers.
    (11) DOE requests comment on the proposed updates for faucets and 
showerheads to replace ``maximum permissible water use allowed'' with 
``water use'' in 10 CFR 430.23(s) and (t), respectively.
    (12) DOE requests comment on the proposed updates for faucets and 
showerheads to replace ``gallons and liters per minute'' with ``gallons 
or liters per minute.''
    (13) DOE requests comment on the impact and associated costs of the 
proposed amendment to incorporate by reference the latest version of 
the industry standard, ASME A112.18.1-2018.
    (14) DOE requests comment on the impact and associated costs of the 
proposed amendment to define low-pressure water dispensers and pot 
fillers and to exclude them explicitly from the faucets definition.
    (15) DOE requests comment on the impact and associated costs of the 
proposed amendment to add clarificationons about conducting testing 
under ASME A112.18.1-2018.
    (16) DOE requests comments on the benefits and burdens of the 
proposed updates and additions to industry standards referenced in the 
test procedure for faucets and showerheads.
    (17) DOE requests comment on its assessment that there would be no 
costs to small businesses as a result of the proposed test procedure 
amendments.

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of 
proposed rulemaking and announcement of public meeting.

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 May 23, 
2022, by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated 
authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original 
signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes 
only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal 
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been 
authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for 
publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This 
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this 
document upon publication in the Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on May 24, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

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

[[Page 32365]]

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. Section 430.2 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the definition for ``Faucet''; and
0
b. Adding in alphabetical order, definitions for ``Low-pressure water 
dispenser'' and ``Pot filler''.
    The revision and additions read as follows:


Sec.  430.2   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Faucet means a lavatory faucet, kitchen faucet, metering faucet, or 
replacement aerator, excluding low-pressure water dispensers and pot 
fillers.
* * * * *
    Low-pressure water dispenser means a terminal fitting that 
dispenses drinking water at a pressure of 105 kPA (15 psi) or less.
* * * * *
    Pot filler means a terminal fitting with an articulated arm and two 
or more shut-off valves that can accommodate only a single supply water 
inlet.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 430.3 in amended by revising paragraph (h)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  430.3   Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) ASME A112.18.1-2018/CSA B125.1-2018 (with 10/18 Errata), 
(``ASME A112.18.1''), ``Plumbing supply fittings,'' approved 2018, IBR 
approved for appendix S to subpart B.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 430.23 is amended by revising paragraphs (s) and (t) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  430.23   Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water 
consumption.

* * * * *
    (s) Faucets. Measure the water use for lavatory faucets, lavatory 
replacement aerators, kitchen faucets, and kitchen replacement 
aerators, in gallons or liters per minute (gpm or L/min), in accordance 
to section 2(a) of appendix S to this subpart. Measure the water use 
for metering faucets, in gallons or liters per cycle (gal/cycle or L/
cycle), in accordance to section 2(a) of appendix S of this subpart.
    (t) Showerheads. Measure the water use for showerheads, in gallons 
or liters per minute (gpm or L/min), in accordance to section 2(b) of 
appendix S to this subpart.
* * * * *
0
5. Appendix S to subpart B of part 430 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix S to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Water Consumption of Faucets and Showerheads

    Note:  Before [date 180 Days After date of publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register], representations with respect to 
the water consumption of faucets and showerheads, including 
compliance certifications, must be based on testing conducted in 
accordance with either this appendix or appendix S as it appeared in 
the 10 CFR parts 200-499 edition revised as of January 1, 2021.
    On and after [date 180 days after date of publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register], representations with respect to 
water consumption of faucets and showerheads, including compliance 
certifications, must be based on testing conducted in accordance 
with this appendix.

    0. Incorporation by reference
    DOE incorporated by reference in Sec.  430.3, the entire 
standard for ASME A112.18.1; however, only enumerated provisions of 
ASME A112.18.1 apply to this appendix, as follows: Section 5.4 
``Flow rate,'' including Figure 3 but excluding Table 1, and 
sections 5.4.2.3.1(a) and (c), 5.4.2.3.2(b) and (c), and 5.4.3. When 
there is a conflict, the language of the test procedure in this 
appendix takes precedence over ASME A112.18.1. Treat precatory 
language in ASME A112.18.1 as mandatory.
    1. Scope: This appendix covers the test requirements to measure 
the hydraulic performance of faucets and showerheads.
    2. Flow Capacity Requirements
    a. Faucets--Measure the water flow rate for faucets, in gallons 
per minute (gpm) or liters per minute (L/min), or gallons per cycle 
(gal/cycle) or liters per cycle (L/cycle), in accordance with the 
test requirements specified in Section 5.4, Flow Rate, of ASME 
A112.18.1. Record measurements at the resolution of the test 
instrumentation. Round each calculation to the same number of 
significant digits as the previous step. Round the final water 
consumption value to one decimal place for non-metered faucets, or 
two decimal places for metered faucets.
    b. Showerheads--Measure the water flow rate for showerheads, in 
gallons per minute (gpm) or liters per minute (L/min), in accordance 
with the test requirements specified in Section 5.4, Flow Rate, of 
ASME A112.18.1. Record measurements at the resolution of the test 
instrumentation. Round each calculation to the same number of 
significant digits as the previous step. Round the final water 
consumption value to one decimal place. If using the time/volume 
method of Section 5.4.2.2(d) i, position the container to ensure it 
collects all water flowing from the showerhead, including any 
leakage from the ball joint.

2.1 General Instruction

2.1.1 Fluid Meter Test Method

    When using the fluid meter method of Section 5.4.2.2(c) of ASME 
A112.18.1 to measure flow rate, ensure the fluid meter meets the 
following additional requirements, first, ensure the fluid meter is 
rated for the flow rate range of the product being tested. Second, 
ensure the fluid meter has a resolution for flow rate of no less 
than two significant figures. Third, verify the fluid meter is 
calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer printed instructions.

2.1.2 Time/Volume Test Method

    There are several additional requirements when using the time/
volume method of Section 5.4.2.2(d) of ASME A112.18.1 to measure 
flow rate. First, ensure the receiving container is large enough to 
contain all the water for a single test and has an opening size and/
or a partial cover such that loss of water from splashing is 
minimized. Second, conduct the time/volume test for at least one 
minute, with the time recorded via a stopwatch with at least 0.1-
second resolution. Third, measure and record the temperature of the 
water using a thermocouple or other similar device either at the 
receiving container immediately after recording the mass of water, 
or at the water in the supply line anytime during the duration of 
the time/volume test. Fourth, measure the mass of water to at least 
two significant figures and normalize it to gallons based on the 
specific gravity of water at the recorded temperature.

[FR Doc. 2022-11438 Filed 5-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>