Federal Register - August 9, 2021
Versione di testo Cosa è?Dateas è un sito indipendente non affiliato a entità governative. La fonte dei documenti PDF che pubblichiamo qui è l'entità governativa indicata in ciascuno di essi. Le versioni in testo sono trascrizioni che realizziamo per facilitare l'accesso e la ricerca di informazioni, ma possono contenere errori o non essere complete.
Source: Federal Register
43434
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 150 / Monday, August 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules
While DOEs request for information is not limited to the following issues, DOE is particularly interested in comment, information, and data on the following.
1. Technology Options
presented in Table II.2. 81 FR 4368, 4383.
A complete list of technology options evaluated for pumps in preparation for the January 2016 ECS Final Rule is
TABLE II.2PUMPS TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS CONSIDERED FOR THE JANUARY 2016 ECS FINAL RULE
Technology Options Improved Hydraulic Design Improved surface finish on wetted components Reduced running clearances Reduced mechanical friction in seals Reduction of other volumetric losses Addition of variable speed drive VSD
Improvement of VSD efficiency Reduced VSD standby and off mode power usage
In the January 2016 ECS Final Rule, DOE determined that most of the technology options listed in Table II.2
had limited potential to improve pump efficiency. 81 FR 4368, 4383.
Specifically, DOE received manufacturer feedback that certain
technologies a did not significantly improve efficiency; b were not applicable to the equipment for which standards were being considered; c did not significantly improve efficiency across the entire scope of each
equipment class; or d benefits degraded quickly over time. Id.
Table II.3 summarizes the pump technology options that DOE screened from its analysis in the January 2016
ECS Final Rule, and the applicable screening criteria.
TABLE II.3PUMPS TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS SCREENED FROM THE JANUARY 2016 ECS FINAL RULE
EPCA criteria Screened technology option
Improved surface finish on wetted componentssmoothing operations
Improved surface finish on wetted componentscoating or plating
Improved surface finish on wetted componentscasting
Reduced running clearances
Reduced mechanical friction in seals
Reduction of other volumetric losses
Addition of variable speed drive
Improvement of VSD efficiency
Reduced VSD standby and off mode power usage
Technological feasibility
Practicability to manufacture, install, and service
Adverse impact on product utility or availability
Adverse impacts on health and safety
Other reasons for not considering the technology
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X, X
X, X
X
X
X
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
DOE screened out these technology options because they were not applicable to the equipment for which standards were being considered or did not significantly improve efficiency across the entire scope of each equipment class.
DOE screened out these technology options because they did not significantly improve efficiency.
DOE screened out these technology options because efficiency improvements from these technologies degrade quickly.
Ultimately, hydraulic redesign was the only design option incorporated into the January 2016 ECS Final Rule engineering analysis. 81 FR 4368, 4385.
Hydraulic redesign is a broad term used to describe the system design of a bare pumps wetted components. Although hydraulic redesign focuses on the specific hydraulic characteristics of the impeller and the volute/casing, it also includes design choices related to clearances, seals, and other volumetric losses.17
17 See Section 3.6.1 Chapter 3 of the TSD for the January 2016 ECS Final Rule. Docket EERE2011
BTSTD00310056.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Aug 06, 2021
Jkt 253001
Issue 6: DOE seeks comment on if there are additional technology options that were not considered during the January 2016 ECS Final Rule that may have a significant potential for improving pump energy use beyond hydraulic redesign. Additionally, DOE
requests feedback on whether, and if so, how, technologically feasible design options might vary by equipment class.
DOE also seeks comment on how any of the listed technologies in Table II.3 may have changed since the January 2016
ECS Final Rule. Specifically, DOE is interested in data that support whether DOE should continue to screen-out the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
technologies listed in Table II.3 from its engineering analysis.
2. Representative Units In the January 2016 ECS Final Rule, DOE identified representative configurations that were based on typical product offerings for each of the five equipment classes. 81 FR 4368, 4385. For the ESCC, ESFM, and IL
equipment classes, the representative configuration was a pump fitted with a cast bronze impeller, a cast-iron volute and a mechanical seal. Id. For RSV and ST equipment classes, the representative configuration was a
E:FRFM09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
