Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

56632

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 193 / Friday, October 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES2

use factor to all units with such a feature, impacting efficiency rank order.
However, the California IOUs also suggested that as clothes dryers deploy improved automatic termination controls and clothes dryer operations, results from appendix D1 may not always be higher than those from appendix D2, an assertion that the California IOUs stated is supported by the 2019 PG&E testing. One unit from the PG&E test sample of four models had a higher CEF value using appendix D2 as compared to appendix D1. NEEA
also cited the PG&E data, and both NEEA and the California IOUs commented that recent DOE-funded clothes dryer testing at Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORNL and PNNL similarly confirmed that the same clothes dryer models tend to achieve a higher efficiency value when tested to the appendix D1 test procedure than when tested to the appendix D2 test procedure, though the observed differences were not consistent across all models. Based on those reports,47
NEEA stated that: 1 CEF values dropped roughly 18 percent when tested according to appendix D2, and the efficiency rank order among the tested models changed as well; 2 on average, the appendix D1 loads had five times the FMC than the appendix D2 loads at termination, but all FMCs were within acceptable limits for both test procedures, which implies that the energy use measured under appendix D1 will be less than the energy use measured under appendix D2 for the same clothes dryer, as clothes dryers remove more moisture under appendix D2; and 3 drying times increased by roughly 80 percent when tested according to appendix D2. NRDC, No.
35 at pp. 12; CEE, No. 27 at pp. 13;
California IOUs, No. 29 at pp. 1619;
NEEA, No. 38 at pp. 39, 18
NEEA, the California IOUs, CEE, and NRDC stated that testing all models to the same procedure would facilitate comparison of performance between them, increasing the utility of the CCMS
database and ENERGY STAR
certification. NRDC and NEEA also suggested that using a single, uniform test procedure would allow for efficiency labeling of clothes dryers under the Federal Trade Commission FTC EnergyGuide labelling program.
NRDC, No. 35 at pp. 12; CEE, No. 27
47 Residential Clothes Dryer Performance Under Timed and Automatic Cycle Termination Test Procedures, Kyle Gluesencamp, ORNL, October 2014; Clothes Dryer Automatic Termination Sensor Evaluation: Volume 1: Characterization of Energy Use in Residential Clothes Dryers, W. TeGrotenhus, Ph.D., PNNL, September 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:49 Oct 07, 2021

Jkt 256001

at pp. 13; California IOUs, No. 29 at pp. 1619; NEEA, No. 38 at pp. 39, 18
NRDC and the California IOUs suggested that because the current standards are based on appendix D1, it might be more appropriate to implement the retirement of appendix D1 during the next standards rulemaking, and they urged DOE to do so if it is not possible in this final rule. NRDC, No. 35 at pp.
12; California IOUs, No. 29 at pp. 16
19
AHAM opposed the removal of appendix D1 and mandatory use of appendix D2. AHAM did not support the existence of different test procedures to demonstrate compliance with the standard, but recognized that manufacturers must currently use a different test procedure to demonstrate ENERGY STAR eligibility for clothes dryers than compliance with energy conservation standards. AHAM stated that because manufacturers have already invested in developing products under this circumstance, it would not be equitable to change the status quo at this time. Accordingly, AHAM urged DOE to maintain both appendices, with appendix D2 being optional as an alternative to appendix D1. AHAM, No.
33 at p. 11
A majority of the clothes dryers on the market continue to test under appendix D1. DOE notes that 746 clothes dryer models 62.6 percent listed in the CCMS database are certified to appendix D1, as compared to 445 models 37.4
percent to appendix D2. DOE
recognizes that under appendix D2, measured CEF values may be lower than CEF values measured under appendix D1. As discussed, appendix D2 includes methods for more accurately measuring the effects of automatic cycle termination and represents a significantly different testing methodology that may impact the energy consumption of some clothes dryers more than others. The current energy conservation standards are based on the test procedure in appendix D1, and to the extent that measured CEF
under appendix D2 is lower than the measured CEF under appendix D1, this difference does not result in products being able to demonstrate compliance with a lower efficiency. For these reasons, DOE is maintaining the appendix D1 and appendix D2 test procedures and is continuing to allow certification in accordance with either test procedure.
6. Cycle Time Reporting Manufacturers are not currently required to report cycle time as part of the certification process. In response to the July 2019 NOPR, DOE received
PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

comments regarding the reporting of cycle times to inform consumer purchasing decisions.
AHAM stated that the purpose of the energy conservation standards program is to regulate the efficiency of the product, not to inform consumers about all of the different factors that could affect their purchase. AHAM asserted that, while DOE should consider the impact of energy conservation standards on performance factors such as drying time, it is not appropriate for DOE to collect data on and create requirements for performance factors. AHAM
questioned whether collecting data on drying time was permissible under EPCA. AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 23 at pp. 8384
NEEA suggested that DOE should require manufacturers to report drying time when testing using appendix D2, because certain efficient clothes dryers might achieve higher efficiency by taking a very long time to dry clothes.
NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
23 at pp. 7980 NEEA and PG&E
encouraged DOE to require reporting of cycle times, suggesting that cycle time is a performance feature that consumers value. NEEA, No. 38 at pp. 3, 1216, 18; PG&E, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 23 at pp. 8081
As stated, EPCA requires that the test procedures prescribed or amended by DOE 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. 6293b3 DOE may require each manufacturer of a covered product to submit information or reports with respect to energy efficiency or energy use of such covered products to ensure compliance with the requirements of EPCA. 42 U.S.C. 6296d DOE
recognizes that cycle time is a relevant consideration under the current product class structure.
On December 16, 2020, DOE
published a final rule December 2020
Final Rule establishing a separate product class for consumer clothes dryers that offer cycle times for a normal cycle of less than 30 minutes. 85 FR
81359.48 On January 19, 2021, the States of California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, and the City of 48 The December 2020 Final Rule also established short-cycle product classes for residential clothes washers.

E:FRFM08OCR2.SGM

08OCR2