Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 167 / Wednesday, September 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules requested comment on whether the two methodologies provided in IEC 60456
provide capacity measurements that result in a test method that measures the energy use of the clothes washer during a representative average use cycle or period of use. Id.
AHAM supported the continued use of the current DOE clothes washer volume measurement, stating that it is accurate, repeatable, and reproducible.
AHAM opposed any changes of the representation of clothes washer volume to a weight-based measurement or other manufacturer-declared capacity because, to AHAMs knowledge, there is not a repeatable, reproducible way to do so. AHAM, No. 5 at pp. 1012 AHAM
described work it has performed over the past decade to develop a test procedure to evaluate capacity in terms of the weight of clothes that can be effectively washed and rinsed, similar to various international approaches. Id. As part of its investigation, AHAM tested cleaning, rinsing, and gentleness on nine randomly selected units to develop a baseline performance. AHAM stated that the results of this testing showed that the variation of the performance scores was too high to yield repeatable or reproducible results. Id. AHAM
stated that any DOE effort to formulate a similar procedure would likely meet similar challenges. Id.
Electrolux supported AHAMs position that alternative capacity measurement methods should not be considered. Electrolux stated that the water volume-based method in use today is easy for third-party laboratories to use, and provides the best and most accurate data for the DOE test method.
Electrolux stated that the water method is neither too restrictive nor too burdensome. Electrolux, No. 11 at p. 1
NEEA commented that DOE should maintain a single method of measurement of volumetric capacity, as it does currently in Appendix J2.
NEEA, No. 12 at pp. 2627 NEEA
stated that DOE should not allow multiple methods of capacity measurement under the test method, stating that this can lead to inconsistency and inequitable application of the test procedure that includes a maximum load size based on basket capacity. Id. NEEA also commented that DOE should not allow manufacturer declarations of capacity that cannot be verified by a third party such as manufacturer reported CADbased determinations. Id. NEEA cited the potentially high burden that would be associated with including washing performance testing that would be required for a manufacturer-reported weight capacity. Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:31 Aug 31, 2021

Jkt 253001

DOE appreciates details and insights from stakeholders and industry regarding efforts to investigate this issue. DOE is not proposing to specify any alternatives to the current capacity measurement procedure at this time.
c. Modifications to the Existing Capacity Method Section 3.1 of Appendix J2 provides the methodology for determining clothes container capacity. In the March 2012 Final Rule, DOE revised the clothes container capacity measurement to better reflect the actual usable capacity compared to the previous measurement procedures. 77 FR 13887, 13917. In the August 2015 Final Rule, DOE further added to the capacity measurement procedure a revised description of the maximum fill volume for front-loading clothes washers, as well as illustrations of the boundaries defining the uppermost edge of the clothes container for top-loading vertical-axis clothes washers and the maximum fill volume for horizontalaxis clothes washers. 80 FR 46729, 46733.
For top-loading vertical-axis clothes washers, DOE defined the uppermost edge of the clothes container as the uppermost edge of the rotating portion of the wash basket. 77 FR 13887, 13917
13918. DOE also concluded that the uppermost edge is the highest horizontal plane that a dry clothes load could occupy in a top-loading verticalaxis clothes washer that would allow clothing to interact with the water and detergent properly. Id.
Samsung recommended that DOE
reconsider the capacity measurement guideline for top-loading clothes washers. Samsung stated that volume should be measured up to the manufacturer-recommended fill line, instead of measuring up to the top of the rotating portion of the clothes container.
Samsung added that the discrepancy between measured volume and manufacturer-recommended fill line may overstate the energy and water efficiency in the test method compared to real-world use. Samsung, No. 6 at p.
2 DOE discussed its justification for the current fill level definition for toploading clothes washers as part of the March 2012 Final Rule. 77 FR 13888, 1391713920. The fill level recommended by Samsung corresponds to Fill Level 1 as described in the March 2012 Final Rule, while the current definition as the uppermost edge of the rotating portion of the wash basket corresponds to Fill Level 2 as described in the March 2012 Final Rule.
As DOE explained in the March 2012

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

49165

Final Rule, by respecting manufacturer recommendations, Fill Level 1 would best ensure wash performance is maintained, and thus is the most consumer-relevant fill level. However, should clothing occupy the space between Fill Level 1 and Fill Level 2
during a wash cycle, the clothing could be cleaned sufficiently because water can still be contained within that volume. Clothing above Fill Level 2, however, is not likely to be cleaned sufficiently because it would be outside the wash basket during the wash cycle and risks being damaged if it becomes entangled on stationary fixtures such as the tub cover or other mechanical components of the clothes washer during the wash cycle. Id. For these reasons, DOE adopted Fill Level 2 for determining the capacity of top-loading clothes washers.
DOE is not aware of any changes to product designs since the March 2012
Final Rule that would cause DOE to reevaluate its conclusions about the most appropriate capacity fill level. In DOEs experience since the March 2012
Final Rule, the existing capacity fill definition is implemented consistently by test laboratories and results in repeatable and reproducible measurements of capacity. DOE is therefore not proposing any changes to the existing capacity measurement method.
DOE requests comment on its tentative determination to maintain the current capacity measurement method.
7. Anomalous Cycles Section 3.2.9 of Appendix J2 specifies discarding the data from a wash cycle that provides a visual or audio indicator to alert the user that an out-ofbalance condition has been detected, or that terminates prematurely if an out-ofbalance condition is detected, and thus does not include the agitation/tumble operation, spin speeds, wash times, and rinse times applicable to the wash cycle under test. In the May 2020 RFI, DOE sought input on whether the test procedure should, in addition to out-ofbalance conditions, also require discarding data for wash cycles in which any other anomalous behavior may be observed. 85 FR 31065, 31070.
DOE also requested information on whether the test procedure should explicitly require that any wash cycle for which data was discarded due to anomalous behavior must also be repeated to obtain data without the anomalous behavior to be included in the energy test cycle. Id.
NEEA requested more specific guidance on when test cycle data should be considered anomalous to ensure test
E:FRFM01SEP3.SGM

01SEP3