[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 24, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18125-18131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9950]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
[Case No. CW-004]
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Granting of
the Application for Interim Waiver and Publishing of the Petition for
Waiver of General Electric Appliances From the DOE Clothes Washer Test
Procedure
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Today's notice grants an Interim Waiver to General Electric
Appliances (GEA) and publishes GEA's Petition for Waiver from the
existing Department of Energy (DOE or Department) clothes washer test
procedure regarding wash temperature selections and automatic water
fill capability for its clothes washer model WZSE5310 (Monogram brand).
GEA seeks a waiver because its clothes washer model WZSE5310 has
the following design features that differ from those covered by the
existing DOE clothes washer test procedures: five wash temperatures (a
cold, three warms and a hot) in a primary mode (factory preset), 34
wash temperatures in a secondary programming mode (i.e., a customizing
feature), and a consumer selectable manual or automatic water fill
capability. GEA seeks to test wash temperature selections by averaging
the three warm wash temperatures (warm-hot/cold, warm/cold and warm-
cold/cold) in the primary mode and then applying the existing test
procedure Temperature Use Factors (TUFs) for a three temperature
machine (hot/cold, warm/cold and cold/cold). In regard to consumer
selectable water fill capability, GEA proposes to use the existing test
procedure manual fill provision. DOE is soliciting comments and
information regarding the Petition for Waiver.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information not later than
May 24, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and statements shall be sent to: Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Case No.
CW-004, Mail Stop EE-431, Room 1J-018, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20585-0121 (202) 586-7140.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
P. Marc LaFrance, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE-431, Forrestal
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121,
(202) 586-8423
Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General
Counsel, Mail Station GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103, (202) 586-9507.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products (other than automobiles) was established pursuant to the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), 42 USC 6291 et
seq., which requires DOE to prescribe standardized test procedures to
measure the energy consumption of certain consumer products, including
clothes washers. The intent of the test procedures is to provide a
comparable measure of energy consumption that will assist consumers in
making purchasing decisions. These test procedures appear at Title 10
CFR Part 430, Subpart B.
DOE amended the test procedure rules to provide for a waiver
process by adding Sec. 430.27 to Title 10, CFR Part 430. (45 FR 64108,
September 26, 1980). Thereafter, DOE further amended the appliance test
procedure waiver process to allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) to grant an
Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that
have petitioned DOE for a waiver from such prescribed test procedures.
(51 FR 42823, November 26, 1986).
The waiver process allows the Assistant Secretary to temporarily
waive the test procedures for a particular basic
[[Page 18126]]
model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more
design characteristics which prevent testing according to the
prescribed test procedures or when the prescribed test procedures may
evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true
energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative
data. Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure
amendments become effective, resolving the problem that is the subject
of the waiver.
The Interim Waiver provisions, added by the 1986 amendment, allow
the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver when it is
determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the
Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the
Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary
determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to
grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for
Waiver. An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or
until DOE issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver,
whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if
necessary.
On October 9, 1995, GEA filed a Petition for Waiver and an
Application for Interim Waiver regarding its clothes washer model
WZSE5310. The design features that differ from those covered by the
existing clothes washer test procedure are: Five wash temperatures (a
cold, three warms and a hot) in a factory preset primary mode, 34 wash
temperature selections in a secondary programming mode which may be
substituted for the factory preset temperatures, and a consumer
activated choice of a manual or automatic water fill capability.
GEA proposed testing either the higher of the factory preset
temperature selection or the mean of the adjustable range of the
secondary programming mode temperature selections. This results in GEA
seeking to test the wash temperature selections by averaging the warm
wash temperatures in the primary (factory preset) mode and then
applying the Temperature Use Factors (TUFs) for a three temperature
machine (hot/cold, warm/cold and cold/cold) found in the existing test
procedure at Section 5.3 of Appendix J to Subpart B. In regard to
consumer selectable water fill capability, GEA proposes to use the
existing test procedure manual fill provision.
Discussion of Comments
Wash Temperature Selections
The Department received comments about the GEA Interim Waiver
Application and Petition for Waiver request from Asko Inc. (ASKO),
Maytag and Admiral Products (Maytag), Speed Queen Company (Speed
Queen), Whirlpool Corporation (Whirlpool) and White Consolidated
Industries, Inc. (White Consolidated).1 All commenters opposed
GEA's proposed method to test the higher of the factory preset or the
mean of the secondary programming mode temperature selection range. All
commenters believed that the hottest setting available in the secondary
programming mode (126 deg.F) should be tested in lieu of the hottest
setting available at the factory preset (120 deg.F) for hot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Comments are available upon request at the address
provided at the beginning of today's notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some commenters proposed various methods on how to test the GEA
clothes washer. Maytag believed the hottest settings available in the
secondary programming mode should be tested and the warm wash
temperatures averaged. Speed Queen believed that the clothes washer
should be tested in the factory preset mode and in the secondary
programming mode (hottest settings available), and then new TUFs should
be applied to the two modes. Whirlpool believed that the Association of
Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) proposed test procedure 2
should be directly applied to the secondary programming mode, thus the
hottest setting available and coldest setting available would be
tested, along with the testing and averaging of all warm wash
(intermediate) temperatures. White Consolidated believed that the AHAM
test procedure should not be applied, that the hottest hot, hottest
cold and either hottest middle warm or hottest higher warm of the
secondary programming mode should be tested (it was unclear to the
Department which one was being recommended).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 On March 23, 1995, DOE published a proposed rule to
amend the clothes washer test procedure. (56 FR 15330). In response
to the Department's Proposed Rule, AHAM proposed a new test
procedure to become effective concurrently with the anticipated
future clothes washer standards. The Department supports AHAM's
effort in developing a new test procedure and will address issues
regarding that test procedure under the appropriate rulemaking
(Docket No. EE-RM-94-230). Although a number of comments reference
the proposed AHAM test procedures, the Department does not believe
that it can be used to establish testing procedures for issues
covered by the existing test procedures. If the issues are not
covered by the existing test procedure, then the AHAM proposed test
procedure may have merit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GEA provided a rebuttal comment that the current test procedure
requires the testing of the ``hottest setting available'' and states
that ``the only `setting' on the new Monogram machine is the main
temperature selection pads on the control panel. This use of the term
`setting' is its normal and conventional meaning.'' GEA believed that
there is no basis to test in the secondary programming mode and that
Australian survey data indicates that the secondary programming mode is
used only six percent of the time. GEA continued to say that its
original proposal is preferable, but if the AHAM test procedure were to
be applied to the secondary programming mode, then it believes new TUFs
should be allowed.
The Department believes that the ``hottest setting available''
refers to available on the clothes washer and not any particular mode
of a clothes washer because the rule language (Section 3.2.2.2) clearly
states ``For automatic clothes washers set the wash/rinse temperature
selector to the hottest setting available (hot/warm).'' Based on the
information and comments available, if the existing test procedure is
applied to the GEA clothes washer, the Department believes that the
hottest setting available on the clothes washer should be tested for
the hot setting. Furthermore, the Department believes this philosophy
should be extended to the warm and cold wash temperature settings
because this is the industry's basic interpretation 3 of the test
procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Manufacturers have voluntarily made this interpretation
for temperature selections other than hot. The Department is aware
of at least one manufacturer who has tested the hottest of a
similarly labeled temperature selection (i.e. auto cold/cold 70/80
deg.F was tested in lieu of cold/cold 60 deg.F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerning GEA's two intermediate warm temperatures [one warm
temperature which is equally hotter than the median warm (warm-hot/
cold) and one which is equally colder than the median warm (warm-cold/
cold)], the Department believes that these temperature selections do
not have to be tested. The Department believes that consumers are just
as likely to choose the hotter warm (warm-hot/cold) as they are to
choose the cooler warm (warm-cold/cold). This position has been
supported by White Consolidated. Furthermore, on November 24, 1992, the
Department rejected a Petition for Waiver from Maytag which had a
clothes washer with intermediate warm temperatures (half hot and half
warm; and half warm and half cold) and indicated that it ``could be
tested using the existing test procedure by neglecting the intermediate
temperature settings.'' The Department also acknowledges that
[[Page 18127]]
this approach will be equivalent to averaging all three warm wash
temperature selections, but it will reduce the test burden. Therefore,
today's Interim Waiver being granted to GEA requires that the hottest
setting available of the hot/cold (126 deg.F), warm/cold (101 deg.F)
and cold/cold (66 deg.F) temperature selections be tested in the
secondary programming mode. The Department requests comments about the
test method provided to GEA in the Interim Waiver and recommendations
for alternatives, if appropriate, considering today's publication.
Automatic Water Fill Capability
GEA did not request a waiver from the existing test procedure to
test its automatic water fill capability feature. However, Asko,
Maytag, Speed Queen and Whirlpool had concerns about this feature.
Maytag believed that testing in the manual mode is acceptable, as long
as all rinse cycles are cold because due to the clothes washer sensing
capability, additional rinse water may be added. Asko, Speed Queen and
Whirlpool believed that the automatic water fill capability should be
tested primarily because they believe that GEA will market the energy
saving potential of the automatic water fill capability. In addition,
Asko indicated that the automatic water fill feature may use more
energy than the manual fill mode. Speed Queen and Whirlpool believed
that the AHAM proposed test procedure should be used for the testing.
GEA rebutted that the existing test procedure requires the minimum
and maximum fill settings be tested and that its machine can be tested
in the manual mode with the minimum and maximum settings and a waiver
was not required.
The Department agrees with GEA that its clothes washer can be
tested with the existing test procedure regarding water fill. However,
a second requirement for a Waiver is whether a test procedure evaluates
a basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy
consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data.
Therefore, the issues regarding GEA's clothes washer raised by the
commenters have merit. GEA has stated to the Department that when
applying the existing test procedure test loads and minimum and maximum
usage fill factors its clothes washer uses less energy when the
automatic water fill mode (as preset from the factory) is used versus
the manual mode. However, the ``sensitivity'' or relative fill amounts
of the automatic water fill mode can be reprogrammed in the secondary
programming mode, thus resulting in an increase in energy consumption
above the manual mode result.
The Department believes that the GEA clothes washer should be
tested to capture both the automatic water fill mode and the manual
water fill mode since both options are available to the consumer. This
can be achieved by testing and averaging the two. This is consistent
with the Department's historical position when actual consumer usage
habits have not been known.4 However, the programmability of the
automatic water fill capability presents some difficulties. First, the
Department believes that the most energy intensive mode of the
automatic fill capability should be tested because this option is
available to the consumer through secondary programming. However, on
the other hand, to only test the most energy intensive mode of
automatic fill capability which is more energy intensive than the
factory preset, does not appear to be entirely fair because the
consumer may also choose to set the automatic water fill mode to a
lower, or less energy intensive mode than the factory preset.
Therefore, on an interim basis until additional comments and hopefully
statistically significant data can be provided, the Department believes
that averaging of the least energy intensive and most energy intensive
modes for automatic water fill capability is the best method to use to
determine the energy use in the automatic water fill mode. This result
shall then be averaged with the test result from the primary manual
water fill mode. The Department requests comments on this test method
and submission of statistically significant consumer usage data, if
available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 For example, the dishwasher test procedure uses a 50
percent usage factor for unheated dry option. (42 FR 15423, March
17, 1977).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Loads/Usage Factors
With regard to activating the automatic water fill capability,
Whirlpool stated that GEA should use the test loads specified in the
AHAM proposed test procedure. The AHAM proposed test procedure
specifies larger test loads which more accurately reflects actual
consumer usage habits and requires additional testing for ``average''
size loads. The Department does not agree with Whirlpool because
presently one manufacturer, Asko, has been granted a Waiver (59 FR
15719, April 4, 1994) for its clothes washers with automatic water fill
capability that uses the existing test procedure test loads to activate
the maximum and minimum fills and uses the existing test procedure
usage fill factors. Imposing larger test loads on GEA and requiring
additional testing would put GEA at a competitive disadvantage because
its competitors are allowed to use the requirements of the existing
test procedure. Therefore, the Interim Waiver granted to GEA today uses
a 3 pound test load to activate the minimum fill test with the current
0.28 usage fill factor, and a 7 pound test load to activate the maximum
fill test with the current 0.72 usage fill factor. In addition, the
Department has used the AHAM proposed rule language, where warranted.
For example, the term ``adaptive water fill control system'' was used
in lieu of ``automatic water fill capability.''
Warm Rinses
Maytag and Speed Queen expressed concerns about the GEA machine
possibly having warm rinses. Speed Queen indicated that although GEA
stated that the normal cycle did not have a warm rinse, it was
concerned about other cycles possibly having warm rinses. Speed Queen
referenced the Department's rulemaking regarding normal cycle
temperature selection lockouts (Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products, Docket No. EE-RM-93-701) and indicated that if a
warm rinse was available, then it should be handled similarly to that
rulemaking. Maytag was concerned about possible additional hot water
use for a warm rinse during an automatic water fill function. The
Department has learned that GEA's clothes washer does have a warm rinse
in the wool cycle. Presently, the test procedure does not allow for
testing of temperature selections in non- normal cycles, so GEA is not
required to test it. However, when the rulemaking for the normal cycle
temperature selection lockout (Docket No. EE-RM-93-701) is finalized,
it is likely that the requirements of that rule will require GEA and
other manufacturers to test warm rinses in cycles other than the normal
cycle.
Justification
(a) Economic Hardship
GEA stated that it currently did not have a Monogram brand product
in its home laundry line. GEA indicated that delay of the introduction
of its clothes washer would also impact the introduction of its
Monogram dryer.
Asko, Whirlpool and White Consolidated all provided comments about
the justification GEA provided to support its Application for Interim
Waiver. In regard to economic hardship, they all basically provided
comments that GEA did not demonstrate economic
[[Page 18128]]
hardship. GEA rebutted indicating that the requirements of 10 CFR, Part
430, Sec. 430.27(g) state that an Interim Waiver be granted if the
applicant will experience economic hardship, or if it appears likely
that the waiver will be granted, or if the waiver is desirable for
public policy reasons. GEA did not provide specific rebuttal relative
to economic hardship.
The Department agrees with Asko, Whirlpool and White Consolidated
that GEA did not demonstrate economic hardship. The failure to sell a
particular clothes washer and/or clothes dryer for a corporation the
size of GEA would most likely not result in economic hardship. However,
if this were to be considered further, GEA would have to provide
specific data to justify that failure to sell its clothes washer would
demonstrate economic hardship.
(b) Likely Approval of the Petition for Waiver
GEA indicated that the Petition for Waiver was likely to be granted
because the GEA proposed test procedure conforms, as much as possible,
with the industry supported AHAM proposed test procedure. Asko
disagreed with GEA's assertion that its petition conforms with the AHAM
proposed test procedure. Asko believed that GEA should conduct field
testing per the provisions of the proposed AHAM test procedure.
The Department believes that it is likely that the Petition for
Waiver (with possible modification) will be granted to GEA because its
clothes washer has features that cannot be tested per the existing test
procedure. Furthermore, if the features of the GEA clothes washer were
not tested, then the test results of the GEA clothes washer may be
materially unrepresentative of its true energy consumption. The
availability of 34 wash temperature selections is different than
traditional clothes washers, although the basic technology is not
novel; an acceptable test procedure can be developed for it. The
Department has addressed the technical issues, i.e., wash temperature
selections, automatic water fill capability, test loads, and warm
rinse, raised by commenters in the Interim Waiver being granted to GEA
today.
Also, the Department has previously granted a Waiver to another
manufacturer (Asko, as indicated above) regarding automatic water fill
capability. Thus, it is likely that the Petition for Waiver will be
granted to GEA. Although the Department has concerns about the
secondary programming mode for automatic water fill capability, the
Department is requiring testing of the most and least energy intensive
condition until data and/or additional comment is received.
With regard to field testing, presently no requirement exists.
However, the Department would support that effort, if it resulted in
the gathering of statistically significant usage data for automatic
water fill capability and the use of the secondary programming mode.
The Department does acknowledge that if, in the future, a Waiver is
granted to GEA, it could be changed significantly from today's Interim
Waiver based on public comment or statistically significant consumer
usage data, if submitted.
(c) Public Policy
GEA indicated that its clothes washer was equipped with high spin
speed, up to 1000 revolutions per minute (RPM), which results in
significant energy savings in the dryer. GEA also indicated that its
clothes washer has automatic water fill capability which is anticipated
to save energy in a consumer's home.
Asko stated that the GEA product is not revolutionary. Asko also
stated that GEA's claim in its Petition is inconsistent with the GEA
position presented publicly to DOE. (DOE hearing on July 12, 1995, for
Docket No. EE-RM-94-230). Asko's concern is that GEA argued to DOE that
remaining moisture content (RMC) should have no bearing on energy use
or energy credits. Whirlpool believed GEA failed to provide a basis
that its clothes washer will save energy. Furthermore, Whirlpool
believed that until such time the test procedure and standards address
reduced RMC, it should not be considered for granting the Petition.
GEA provided rebuttal, and stated that although it ``argued that a
clothes washer energy efficiency standard based on a mandatory RMC
requirement is inappropriate, it has consistently supported the energy
savings benefits of reduced RMC.'' (GEA rebuttal comment of November 9,
1995, page 4). GEA also indicated that its clothes washer will achieve
RMC levels of less than 40 percent which would result in approximately
$20/year savings versus a clothes washer with 62 percent RMC.
The Department believes that the GEA clothes washer offers
technology that has the possibility of saving significant amounts of
energy. The Administration is committed to promoting energy efficient
technologies, such as, clothes washers with automatic water fill
capability and high spin speed. The Department has estimated that a
clothes washer with 40 percent RMC will save approximately $15/year for
consumers (weighted between gas and electric dryers) or approximately
40 percent of the cost to run their dryers versus a clothes washer with
62 percent RMC.\5\ Although RMC provisions are not reflected in the
current test procedure,\6\ the Department promotes energy efficiency
improvements for consumer products. In addition, the GEA clothes washer
is a vertical-axis clothes washer which has a RMC level below 40
percent. The Department is not aware of any vertical-axis clothes
washer with that low level of RMC. With regard to automatic water fill
capability, the laundry industry has submitted shipment weighted
average data to the Department indicating that the automatic water fill
feature would save approximately 11 percent of the energy consumed in a
clothes washer.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See the Department's preliminary Engineering Analysis,
comment 40 on Docket No. EE-RM-94-403. Also, 62 percent RMC
represents the current industry shipment weighted average for
clothes washers.
\6\ The Department has proposed this, see Docket No. EE-RM-94-
230.
\7\ See AHAM comment No. 38, Docket No. EE-RM-94-403.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whirlpool expressed a concern that the GEA clothes washer may not
meet the minimum energy conservation standard.\8\ GEA rebutted that if
its clothes washer were tested per its submitted Application, then it
would exceed the minimum energy conservation standard. GEA is required
to certify with the Department that its clothes washer meets the
standard before it distributes the machine in commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Department has imposed minimum energy conservation
standards for consumer products (see 10 CFR, Part 430, Section
430.32). The Department is also presently reviewing the clothes
washers standards to determine if they need to be more stringent
(see Docket No. EE-RM-94-403).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, based on the likely approval of the Petition for Waiver
and for public policy reasons, the Department grants GEA an Interim
Waiver from the DOE test procedures for its clothes washer model
WZSE5310. GEA shall be permitted to test its clothes washer on the
basis of the test procedures specified in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B,
Appendix J, with the following modifications:
(i) Add new sections, 1.19 through 1.21 in Appendix J to read as
follows:
1.19 ``Adaptive water fill control system'' refers to a clothes
washer water fill control system which is capable of automatically
adjusting the water fill level based on the size or weight of the test
load placed in the clothes container, without allowing or requiring
consumer intervention and/or actions.
1.20 ``Manual water fill control system'' refers to a clothes
washer water
[[Page 18129]]
fill control system which requires the consumer to determine or select
the water fill level.
1.21 ``Secondary programming mode'' means an auxiliary function
used to adjust temperature, water level, rinse options or other
characteristics of the machine. The user must not be able to access
these adjustments from the normal operating mode of the machine, and
access to the secondary mode must not be necessary to operate the
machine.
(ii) Section 2.8 through 2.8.2.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and
replaced with the following:
2.8 Use of test loads.
2.8.1 Top-loader-vertical-axis clothes. The top-loader clothes
washer shall be tested without a test load, except for clothes washers
equipped with an adaptive water fill control system. Clothes washers
equipped with an adaptive water fill control system shall use a test
load per section 2.8.2.
2.8.2 Front-loader and top-loader-vertical-axis with an adaptive
water fill control system, clothes washers.
2.8.2.1 Standard size clothes washer. When the maximum water fill
level is being tested, the test load shall be seven pounds as described
in section 2.7.1. When the minimum water fill level is being tested,
the test load shall be three pounds as described in section 2.7.2.
2.8.2.2 Compact size clothes washer. When either the maximum or
minimum water fill levels are being tested, the test load shall be as
described in section 2.7.2.
(iii) Section 3.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with
the following:
3.2 Test cycle. Establish the test conditions set forth in 2 of
this Appendix. For clothes washers with both an adaptive water fill
control system and a manual water fill control system, test both the
manual and adaptive modes. Additionally, for clothes washers equipped
with more than one adaptive water fill control selection, including
clothes washers with secondary programming modes, test the selection
that will result in the maximum energy consumption and the selection
that will result in the minimum energy consumption.
(iv) Section 3.2.2.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced
with the following:
3.2.2.2 For automatic clothes washers, set the wash/rinse
temperature selector to the hottest setting available (hot/warm),
including a secondary programming mode.
(v) Section 3.2.2.6 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced
with the following:
3.2.2.6 For automatic clothes washers repeat sections 3.2.2.3,
3.2.2.4, and 3.2.2.5 for each of the other wash/rinse temperature
selections available that use hot water, including a secondary
programming mode. For clothes washers with multiple warm wash
temperature selections, test only the median warm wash setting at the
hottest temperature available. For clothes washers that have a cold
wash which uses hot water, test using the hottest temperature
available.
(vi) Section 4.1 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with
the following:
4.1 Per-cycle temperature-weighted hot water consumption for
maximum and minimum water fill levels. For the manual water fill and
the adaptive water fill (the maximum energy consumption adaptive water
fill and the minimum energy consumption adaptive water fill, if
needed), calculate for the cycle under test the per-cycle temperature
weighted hot water consumption for the maximum water fill level,
Vmax, and for the minimum water fill level, Vmin, expressed
in gallons per cycle and defined as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.000
where:
Vi=reported hot water consumption in gallons per cycle at maximum
fill for each wash/rinse TUF combination setting, as provided in
section 3.2.2.
TUFi=applicable temperature use factor in section 5 or 6.
n=number of wash/rinse TUF combination setting available to the user
for the clothes washer under test.
TUFw=temperature use factor for warm wash setting.
For clothes washers equipped with the suds-saver feature:
X1=frequency of use without the suds-saver feature=0.86.
X2=frequency of use with the suds-saver feature=0.14.
ShH=fresh make-up water measured during suds-return cycle at
maximum water fill level.
For clothes washers not equipped with the suds-saver feature:
X1=1.0
X2=0.0
and
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.002
where:
Vj=reported hot water consumption in gallons per cycle at minimum
fill for each wash/rinse TUF combination setting, as provided in
section 3.3.3.
TUFj=applicable temperature use factor in section 5 or 6.
[[Page 18130]]
ShL=fresh hot make-up water measured during suds-return cycle at
minimum water fill level.
n=as defined above.
TUFw=as defined above.
X1=as defined above.
X2=as defined above.
For clothes washers that have more than one adaptive water fill
control selection, the (Vmax) adaptive (s) and (Vmin)
adaptive (s) calculated for the maximum and the minimum energy
consumption tests shall be averaged respectively, to report a single
(Vmax) adaptive and (Vmin) adaptive to be used in
4.2 for additional calculations.
(vii) Section 4.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with
the following:
4.2 Total per-cycle hot water energy consumption for maximum and
minimum water fill levels. Calculate the total per-cycle hot water
energy consumption for the maximum water fill level, Emax, and for
the minimum water level, Emin, for both the manual and adaptive
fills, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle, as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.003
where,
MF=Multiplying factor to account for the absence of a test load=0.94
for top-loader clothes washers that are sensor filled, 1.0 for top
loader clothes washers that are time-filled, 1.0 for all front-loader
clothes washers, and 1.0 for adaptive fill tests.
T=Temperature rise=90 deg.F.
K=Water specific heat in kilowatt-hours per gallon degree F=0.0024.
(Vmax) manual , (Vmax) adaptive=As defined in
section 4.1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.004
and
where,
MF=As defined above.
T=As defined above.
K=As defined above.
(Vmin) manual , (Vmin) adaptive=As defined in
section 4.1.
(viii) Section 4.4 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with
the following:
4.4 Per-cycle machine electrical energy consumption. The values
recorded in section 3.3.1 are the per-cycle machine electrical energy
consumptions; ME manual, for a manual water fill control system;
ME adaptive, for an adaptive water fill control system; expressed
in kilowatt-hours per cycle. The following equation shall be used to
calculate the per-cycle machine electrical energy consumption, ME,
expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.005
For clothes washers that have more than one adaptive water fill
control selection, the ME adaptive (s) reported for the maximum
and the minimum energy consumption tests shall be averaged to report a
single ME adaptive for the above equation.
This Interim Waiver is based upon the presumed validity of
statements and all allegations submitted by GEA Appliances Inc. This
Interim Waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a
determination that the factual basis underlying the Application is
incorrect.
The Interim Waiver shall remain in effect for a period of 180 days,
or until the Department acts on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is
sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180-day period, if
necessary.
Pursuant to paragraph (b) of Title 10 CFR 430.27, DOE is hereby
publishing the ``Petition for Waiver'' in its entirety. The Petition
contains no confidential information. DOE would appreciate comments,
data and other information regarding the Petition, discussed above.
Issued in Washington, DC April 4, 1996.
Christine A. Ervin,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
October 9, 1995.
Assistant Secretary,
Conservation and Renewable Energy, United States Department of
Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585
RE: Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver, Appendix
J, Subpart B CFR part 430, Test Method for Clothes Washers with no
Applicable Temperature Usage Factor
Dear Assistant Secretary: This Application for Interim Waiver
and Petition for Waiver is submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27,
which provides for a modification of the required test method
because of design characteristics preventing testing or producing
data unrepresentative of a covered product's true energy consumption
characteristics.
GE Appliances (GEA) is sourcing its top of the line, Monogram
Brand, washer from Fisher & Paykel Industries Limited, New Zealand.
The model number is WZSE5310. This product has innovative design
characteristics which prevent testing it in strict accordance to the
existing Appendix J test method. These design characteristics are:
--Five temperature selections in the primary wash mode including
hot, warm-hot, warm, warm-cold and cold wash--all with a cold rinse.
This product does not have water heating capability and achieves the
five temperatures by adjustment of the hot/cold mix ratio. A warm
rinse option is not available in the normal cycle.
--A secondary programming mode which the consumer can access to
adjust the factory preset temperatures of the five settings in the
primary wash mode. In all, the consumer has a choice of 34 wash
temperatures.
[[Page 18131]]
<-----(colder) secondary="" programming="" mode="" (hotter)--=""> Adjustment Temperatures (F)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factory
Preset
Wash temp. setting (except
cold
setting)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot............................................. 112 114 116 118 120 122 124 126
Warm-hot........................................ 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 111
Warm............................................ 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101
Warm-cold....................................... 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91
Cold:
Cold water only*............................ 54 56 58 60 62 64 66
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Factory Preset for COLD setting.
This request for waiver is submitted because (1) The combination
of five pre-set temperature selections--all with a cold water
rinse--are incompatible with any of the TUF tables in Section 4 of
the regulations; and (2) the requirement of section 3.2.2.6 that we
test all temperature selections that use hot water is unduly
burdensome. Instead, we propose modified regulations that will allow
for a conservative testing protocol appropriate to this product that
is also in accordance with the negotiated AHAM proposed rule.
GEA proposes an Interim Waiver and Waiver to allow testing of
the machine per Appendix J with the following modifications:
Add the following definition to the test procedure:
1.19 ``Secondary programming mode'' means an auxiliary function
used to adjust temperature, water level, rinse options or other
characteristics of the machine. The user must not be able to access
these adjustments from the normal operating mode of the machine, and
access to the secondary mode must not be necessary to operate the
machine.
Change section 3.2.2.6 of the test procedure as follows:
3.2.2.6 For automatic clothes washers repeat 3.2.2.3, 3.2.2.4,
and 3.2.2.5 for each of the other wash/rinse temperature selections
available that use hot water except: 1) if wash temperature
selections are uniformly distributed, by temperature, between ``hot
wash'' and ``cold wash'', the reportable values to be used for the
warm water wash setting shall be the arithmetic average of hot and
cold selections measurements of 2) if wash temperature selections
are non-uniformly distributed, by temperature, between ``hot wash''
and ``cold wash'', test all intermediate wash temperature selections
and average the results to obtain the reportable warm wash values.
For semi-automatic clothes washers. . .
For model WZSE5310 this would mean using Alternate II from the
three temperature selection TUF table, section 5.3 of Appendix J
Hot/Cold, Warm/Cold, Cold/Cold, and using the average of the three
warm settings on the machine for Warm/Cold. This also conforms with
the new test procedure proposed by AHAM section 3.5.1. (The warm
setting is the default wash temperature for all cycles.)
Change section 3.5 of the test procedure as follows:
3.5.2.1 If the wash temperature offered in the normal operating
mode of the machine can be further adjusted in a secondary
programming mode, the higher of the factory preset temperature or
the mean of the adjustable range shall be used for testing.
For model WZSE5310 this means using the factory preset
temperatures for the Hot and Warm settings and 60F for the Cold
setting for testing.
The table above shows the possible temperature settings for the
machine (approximate bath water temperatures). To achieve the
temperatures to the right and left of the factory preset
temperatures on the table, the user must read the owners' guide to
learn how to enter a secondary programming mode and make a special
effort to enter this mode and change the temperatures. We feel
strongly that this secondary programming mode will be used very
infrequently because an Australia consumer survey of 202 users
showed that only about 6% of those consumers ever entered this mode
to adjust temperatures. There is no U.S. consumer data showing how
many consumers will enter the secondary programming mode and the
frequency that the consumers will adjust the temperatures. Lacking
this data, it is logical to assume that if consumers make the effort
to enter the secondary mode, it is equally or more likely that the
consumer will adjust the temperature down, saving energy, as it is
that the consumer will raise the temperature. This is especially
true since there are 4 downward adjustments and only 3 upward
adjustments possible. The owners' guide will also inform the
consumer that adjusting the temperature downward will save energy.
Thus, we believe that the most representative wash temperatures are
the factory preset temperatures.
GEA requests immediate relief by grant of the proposed Interim
Waiver, justified by the following reasons:
Economic Hardship--GEA currently has no Monogram brand product
in its home laundry product line. Delay of introduction of the this
product will not allow GE to complete its product line. Since a
Monogram dryer will be introduced with this product, its
introduction would also be delayed.
Likely Approval of Waiver--The Petition for Waiver is likely to
be granted because the test procedure proposed conforms as much as
possible with the new test procedure supported by AHAM. This new
AHAM test procedure is likely to be adopted.
Public Policy Merits-GE's Monogram washers are designed to
efficiently extract more water from wet clothes by a high speed spin
cycle, up to 1000 RPM. Such water extraction is many times more
energy efficient than drying the same amount of water. This
innovation in clothes washer design does not affect the test method
for clothes washers, but does result in increased total energy
savings. GE's new washer is also factory preset to an auto water
fill level. The machine senses the clothes load and uses only the
amount of water necessary to clean the clothes. Because a manual
High/Medium/Low water fill level is also available, we will test the
machine using the manual water levels per the test procedure.
However, the auto water fill feature is expected to show actual
energy savings for the consumer.
Thank you for considering this petition.
Lee Bishop,
Senior Counsel Product Safety/Regulatory.
Jane Ransdell,
Energy Standards Engineer.
[FR Doc. 96-9950 Filed 4-23-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
