[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 24, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27442-27446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12622]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
10 CFR Part 430
[Docket No: EE-RM-93-701]
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, DOE.
ACTION: Proposed Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document reproposes amendments to the Department of
Energy's clothes washer test procedure to provide a means to test
clothes washers that are designed to lock out wash/rinse temperature
selections from the normal cycle.
DATES: Consumer usage test data for clothes washers that ``lockout''
certain temperature selections shall be provided to DOE by June 30,
1995, and will be placed in Department's Freedom of Information Reading
Room. Comments, including comments on any consumer usage data that are
submitted, shall be provided by July 31, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and data (ten copies) are to be submitted
to: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Proposed Test Procedures for Clothes Washers, Docket
No. EE-RM-93-701, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
P. Marc LaFrance, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE-43, Forrestal
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (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, (202) 586-9507
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
An amended appliance energy conservation standard for clothes
washers became effective May 14, 1994. Manufacturers are required to
test their clothes washers for compliance with the new standard using
the test procedure regulations set forth in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B,
Appendix J.
Whirlpool Corporation (Whirlpool) designed a new line of clothes
washers to meet this standard which lock out a warm rinse when the user
selects a hot water wash/warm water rinse temperature combination
setting in the cycle Whirlpool has designated as the ``normal cycle.''
That is, although the controls may be set for a warm rinse in this
circumstance, a cold water rinse would be provided. However, a warm
rinse is available in all other cycles. Thus, energy consumption in the
``normal cycle'' is lower than in the other cycles which offer a warm
rinse option.
Whirlpool requested an informal interpretation of the test
procedure from the Department's Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy in 1992, and again in early 1993. Whirlpool asserted
that the test procedure requires all testing be conducted in the
``normal cycle'' as defined in Section 1.10 of the test procedure, with
the temperature selector set to the hottest setting that is available
in the normal cycle. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy responded by letters dated December 18, 1992, and April 21,
1993, which disagreed with Whirlpool's interpretation. Whirlpool
engaged in further discussions with the Department's Office of General
Counsel, and after review, the General Counsel wrote a letter to
Whirlpool on October 20, 1993 stating: ``Whirlpool's interpretation of
the test procedure is one that the Department concurs is a permissible
reading of the test procedure. The Department believes, however, that
Whirlpool's interpretation may yield results not consistent with the
objectives of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended.'' The
letter further stated that the Department planned to amend the test
procedure to clarify the testing requirements for clothes washers that
do not have all of the temperature combinations available in the normal
cycle.
II. Discussion
The Department published a proposed rule to amend the clothes
washer test procedure to address the Whirlpool clothes washer
``lockout'' issue. 58 FR 67710 (December 22, 1993) (hereafter referred
to as the December 1993 Proposed Rule). A public hearing was held on
February 24, 1994.
The Department received eight written comments in response to the
proposed rule and received testimony from four persons at the public
hearing. Written comment or testimony was provided by the American
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), Frigidaire Company
(Frigidaire), General Electric Appliances (GEA), Maytag Corporation
(Maytag), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the
[[Page 27443]] Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE), Speed Queen Company
(Speed Queen), and Whirlpool.
(A) Proposed Test Procedure Amendment Issues
1. Temperature Selection Lockout. The Department proposed to test a
clothes washer with a warm rinse ``lockout'' feature by prorating the
hot water consumption between the temperature combination setting in
the normal cycle and the corresponding temperature combination in the
cycle with the greatest hot water consumption, for each temperature
combination selection locked out of the normal cycle. The unknown
factor in the calculation is the frequency with which users will choose
the normal versus other cycles when a warm rinse is selected, that is,
the proration value. As stated in the December 1993 Proposed Rule,
clothes washers which offer the warm rinse lockout design feature had
not been distributed in commerce and, therefore, no data regarding the
effect of this feature on consumer selection were available.
Whirlpool asserted that consumer usage of the normal cycle would
not change because of the lockout feature, and that, based on Proctor
and Gamble's (P&G) historical consumer usage data on the use of the
normal cycle versus other cycles, it was appropriate to assume that
users would use the normal cycle 75 percent of the time in spite of the
warm rinse lock out. Because of confidentiality concerns raised by
Whirlpool, the Department did not consult with other manufacturers or
industry experts on this issue. Based on Whirlpool's argument, DOE
proposed a proration value at 75 percent, that is, users would override
the normal cycle ``lockout'' only 25 percent of the time. The
Department stated that the proposed proration was subject to revision
as data becomes available to reflect actual consumer usage of machines
with the lockout feature.
ACEEE 1 was ``troubled'' by use of the 75/25 apportionment,
because it was not based on empirical measurements on how consumers
would actually use washers. ``Therefore, we recommend that for the
present time, a 100 percent weighing factor be assigned to the most
energy-intensive cycle, until such time that empirical data is
available on how these washers will actually be used.'' (ACEEE, No. 5
at 1).
\1\ Comments on the proposed rule have been assigned docket
numbers and have been numbered consecutively. Statements that were
presented at the February 24, 1994, public hearing are identified as
Testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag stated, ``While Maytag's data indicates the `normal cycle'
use to be 67%, this percentage could be dramatically impacted by the
manner in which a manufacturer designs and displays its `normal cycle'
for the product.'' (Maytag, No. 1 at 5). Maytag further stated, ``If
you put a normal cycle on a washer that is not too appealing to the
customer * * * it's [use is] going to drop down to some lower number.''
(Maytag, Testimony at 14).
Frigidaire stated, ``The 75/25 apportionment is inappropriate''
because it ``is based on products where all temperature options are
available in the normal cycle'' and ``is not valid for a product with a
`new' feature.'' (Frigidaire, No. 2 at 3). Frigidaire further stated,
``I don't see how the proposed lockout saves any energy at all. * * *
It will just require the consumer to use a different named cycle to get
the results, or to get the water temperatures that they want to use.''
(Frigidaire, Testimony at 38).
GEA stated, ``We question what effect the temperature lockout
feature will have on the 75%/25% cycle usage assumptions which justify
the usage factors found in the calculation.'' (GEA, No. 3 at 6). Speed
Queen stated, ``Consumers will quickly modify their usage pattern by
switching to select the cycle most nearly approximating a `normal'
cycle to obtain the hot wash/warm rinse selection.'' (Speed Queen, No.
8 at 2).
Frigidaire also produced an estimate of the impact of the proposed
rule. Frigidaire stated that the proposed test procedure would
underestimate energy consumption by 24.9 percent and 31.4 percent for
its five-temperature and four-temperature machines, respectively, as
compared to clothes washers without warm rinse lockout. (Frigidaire,
No. 2 at 7).
Whirlpool's comment is the only one that supported the proposed
apportionment. (Whirlpool, No. 4 at 5 and No. 9 at 6). Whirlpool
believes that the 75 percent value for use of the normal cycle has been
consistent over many surveys.2 It also believes the type of cycle
to be used is chosen first, then the temperature selection is made.
However, Whirlpool acknowledged that it did not have machines in the
field to develop data concerning the validity of the proposal.
(Whirlpool, Testimony at 25). Whirlpool offered to conduct a market
study to evaluate consumer use of the product with and without the warm
rinse lockout. (Whirlpool, No. 9 at 6).
\2\ Proctor and Gamble survey data from numerous years was
referenced in Whirlpool's submission. However, the survey data was
not based on usage of clothes washers with a lockout feature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon review of the comments, the Department is inclined to
agree with the majority of commenters that users seeking a warm rinse
will shift to a cycle other than the normal cycle to get the desired
temperature combination more often than 25 percent of the time. The
Department has concluded therefore that use of the 75 percent weighting
for use of the normal cycle is inappropriate. Whirlpool's assumption
regarding consumer behavior, i.e., that the use of the normal cycle
would not be affected by the presence of a warm rinse lockout, is not
supported by any empirical data 3 or by any other major clothes
washer manufacturer. Consumers will most likely alter their cycle usage
patterns if they desire a particular temperature selection.
\3\ The P&G data concerning choices among cycles were not
obtained under conditions where the lockout feature was present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department nonetheless believes that a warm rinse lockout on
the normal cycle will result in some reduction in hot water usage
because a small percentage of consumers will use the normal cycle with
the locked out warm rinse feature, rather than adjusting the controls
to another cycle in order to get a warm rinse. Thus, the Department is
proposing an amendment to the clothes washer test procedure with a
credit of 20 percent for the temperature selection lockout design
feature. That is, instead of a 75/25 percent split between the normal
cycle and the most energy intensive cycle for locked out temperature
selections as proposed in the December 1993 Proposed Rule, DOE is
proposing a 20/80 percent split in today's Notice.
The Department remains interested in receiving statistically
significant consumer usage data for clothes washers with locked out
temperature selections in the normal cycle. The Department expects to
receive consumer usage data from Whirlpool. The Department welcomes any
other interested party to submit consumer usage data. Moreover, DOE
will make available for review any data submitted to the Department in
response to today's Notice.
Although the lockout feature's energy saving value is subject to
question, the Department encourages the introduction of control
features for appliances that can be fully demonstrated to save energy.
2. Lockout Features other than Temperature Selection. The comments
expressed a concern that other features or selections could be locked
out. [[Page 27444]] Frigidaire, Speed Queen, and Maytag indicated that
a hot wash or a maximum water level could also be locked out.
(Frigidaire, Testimony at 35; Speed Queen, No. 8 at 1; Maytag, No. 1 at
5).
Today's proposed rule addresses all possible temperature selection
lockouts. Possible lockouts relating to wash time and maximum fill
level were not part of the December 1993 Proposed Rule and are not
addressed in today's Notice. The commenters' concerns appear to be
unfounded under the existing test procedure. The requirement for wash
time is specified as a basic test condition (Section 2.10), and any
testing conducted with less time than 9.75 minutes of agitation time
would not comply with the requirements of the existing regulations. The
requirement for maximum fill is specified prior to the selection of the
wash cycle and refers to the maximum fill of the clothes washer.
Moreover, DOE is not aware of any products currently employing such
lockout designs. Such designs, should they emerge, could be addressed
in a separate rulemaking.
3. Energy Test Cycle. Several commenters raised questions about the
Department maintaining the requirement for testing in the ``normal''
cycle. Maytag, Speed Queen, and GEA proposed the use of an energy test
cycle which would include elements such as minimum wash time, all wash/
rinse temperature combinations, maximum water fill, and maximum spin
speed. Maytag suggested specific changes to the test procedure for its
proposed test cycle. (Maytag, No. 6 at 1). Speed Queen proposed that a
test cycle be adopted with requirements very similar to Maytag's
proposal. (Speed Queen, No. 8 at 1). GEA supported the Maytag proposal
of a test cycle if the Department continued with the amendment. (GEA,
No. 12 at 4). The ODOE supported the Maytag suggestion of a test cycle.
(ODOE, No. 11 at 1). The ACEEE generally supported the Maytag proposal
but believes it should be done in a subsequent rulemaking. (ACEEE, No.
5 at 2).
The Department does not believe it would be appropriate in this
rulemaking to adopt an alternate test cycle. Furthermore, the
Department does not have any assessment as to how an alternate test
cycle would affect existing models and the potential development of new
models. The Department may consider adopting an alternate test cycle in
the future.
4. Ambiguity in Test Procedure. The Department received comments
indicating that the test procedure proposed in the December 1993
Proposed Rule was ambiguous and complicated. Frigidaire indicated that
the proposed test procedure was unnecessarily complicated and adds test
burden and ambiguities with room for creative interpretation.
(Frigidaire, No. 2 at 8 and Testimony at 34).
The Department has clarified the proposed amendment to the test
procedure so that there is no change to any testing requirements for
clothes washers that do not incorporate temperature selection lockouts.
The proposed amendment has been clarified to reference specifically the
sections that are inapplicable to clothes washers without temperature
selection lockouts (see Section 3.2). Additionally, the definition of
the ``non-normal cycle'' was modified to specifically exclude any
manually selected pre-wash, pre-soak, and extra-rinse cycles.
5. Classes. Frigidaire recommends having a separate class and
minimum energy standard for clothes washers with lockout. (Frigidaire,
Testimony at 31). NRDC opposed the addition of a separate class and
minimum energy standard for clothes washers with lockout. (NRDC, No. 10
at 2). The Department believes that a separate class and standard for
products with lockout features is not justified. The primary reason is
that clothes washers with temperature selection lockouts do not provide
any added utility to the consumer and, therefore, do not warrant a
separate class.
6. Effective Date of Amended Test Procedure. Commenters criticized
the Department's proposal to allow one year of lead time from the date
of publication of the final rule to the date the test procedure
amendment becomes effective. Comments opposing a one-year lead time
include Maytag (Maytag, No. 1 at 4), ACEEE (ACEEE, No. 5 at 1), Speed
Queen (Speed Queen, No. 8 at 2), NRDC (NRDC, No. 10 at 3), and ODOE
(ODOE, No. 11 at 2). All of these commenters believe that a 180-day
lead time is sufficient. Whirlpool agreed with the Department's
original proposal of one year lead time. (Whirlpool, No. 9 at 6).
The Department agrees with the majority of commenters that 180 days
is reasonable. Coupled with the advance notice of a likely change in
the test procedure provided by this Notice, an effective date 180 days
following publication of the final rule should provide ample time for
manufacturers to make any necessary adjustments.
7. Impact on Existing Efficiency Standard. To the Department's
knowledge, Whirlpool is the only manufacturer of clothes washers that
is actively considering use of a lockout feature, and is thus the only
manufacturer directly affected by today's proposed rule. The Department
has determined that the proposed amendment to the test procedure will
not significantly alter measured energy use or energy efficiency, and
thus no change in the energy efficiency standard would be required
under 42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2).
(B) Interpretation of Test Procedures
The Department received numerous comments concerning the
Department's procedures for providing informal interpretations of test
procedures to manufacturers, such as the one provided to Whirlpool
concerning the ``lockout'' issue.
GEA called for the Department to provide notice and an opportunity
for comment before issuing an interpretation. (GEA, No. 3 at 3-4).
Maytag strongly urged the Department to adopt internal procedures
designed to provide appropriate notice to all parties potentially
affected by a request for an informal interpretative ruling. (Maytag,
No. 1 at 3). Speed Queen said a Petition for Waiver was the proper
vehicle necessary to institute a test procedure change in this matter.
(Speed Queen, No. 8 at 2). Whirlpool supported the Department's process
of interpretation. (Whirlpool, No. 9 at 2-3).
On April 8, 1994, DOE met with representatives of trade
associations and manufacturers to discuss procedures to be implemented
with regard to future requests concerning interpretations of DOE
regulations. Having considered the views of various interested parties,
DOE has opened and will maintain a file in its headquarters' Freedom of
Information Reading Room in which DOE will make available any written
request for an informal, non-binding interpretative ruling and any
written informal rulings issued by DOE. These materials will be placed
in the DOE Freedom of Information Reading Room under the heading
``Consumer Product Informal Interpretations, Docket No. EE-OBT-
INTERPS.'' Interested persons may examine and copy the file
periodically.
The Department does not propose to amend the existing procedures
for obtaining formal Interpretations in today's notice. The procedures
for formal Interpretations are set out in 10 CFR Secs. 205.80-205.86.
III. Regulatory Review
The December 1993 Proposed Rule set forth determinations with
regards to: Environmental Review, Regulatory Planning and Review,
Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Federalism Review. The determinations
made under each of [[Page 27445]] these topics in the December 1993
Proposed Rule remain valid.
A. ``Takings'' Assessment Review
It has been determined pursuant to Executive Order 12630 (52 FR
8859, March 18, 1988) that this regulation would not result in any
takings which might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to
the United States Constitution.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act Review
No new information or record keeping requirements are imposed by
this rulemaking. Accordingly, no OMB clearance is required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
IV. Public Comment
Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting data, comments or information with respect to the proposed
test procedure amendment. Public comment has already been received on
many elements of this proposal in response to the December 1993
Proposed Rule, so the Department is particularly interested in comments
on the key changes from the December 1993 Proposed Rule--the 20/80
proration for use of the normal cycle with a temperature lockout and
the effective date 180 days after publication of the final rule.
Interested persons are invited to submit statistically significant
usage data or information on the usage behavior of consumers with
clothes washers that have temperature selections locked out of the
normal cycle. Such data or information shall be sent to the address
indicated at the beginning of the notice. Comments with regard to the
proposed amendment or comments on any submitted consumer usage data,
which will be available in the Department's Freedom of Information
Room, shall also be sent to the address indicated at the beginning of
this notice.
Data and comments should be identified both on the envelope and on
the documents as ``Amendment of the Test Procedure for Clothes Washers,
Docket No. EE-RM-93-701.'' Ten (10) copies are requested to be
submitted. If possible, the Department would appreciate an electronic
copy of the comments on a 3.5'' diskette. The Department is currently
using WordPerfect TM 5.1. All submittals received by the dates
specified at the beginning of this notice will be considered by the
Department of Energy before final action is taken on the Proposed Rule.
Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting
information which he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by
law from public disclosure should submit one complete copy of the
document and nine copies, if possible, from which the information
believed to be confidential has been deleted. The Department of Energy
will make a determination with regard to the confidential status of the
information and treat it according to its determination.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and procedure, Energy conservation,
Household appliances.
Issued in Washington, DC, May 5, 1995.
Christine A. Ervin,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
1. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309.
Appendix J [Amended]
2. In appendix J to subpart B of part 430, paragraphs 1.10 through
1.18 are redesignated as paragraphs 1.13 through 1.21, paragraph 1.9 is
redesignated as paragraph 1.10 and new paragraphs 1.9, 1.11 and 1.12
are added to read as follows:
1. Definitions
* * * * *
1.9 ``Lock out'' means to make unavailable at least one wash/
rinse water temperature combination in the normal cycle that is
available in another cycle on the machine.
* * * * *
1.11 ``Most energy intensive cycle'' means a cycle other than
the normal cycle that uses the most energy when tested with the
required wash/rinse temperature combinations.
1.12 ``Non-normal cycle'' means a cycle other than the normal
cycle, excluding any manually selected pre-wash, pre-soak, or extra
rinse.
* * * * *
3. Paragraph 3.2 of appendix J to subpart B of part 430 is revised
to read as follows:
3. Test Measurements
* * * * *
3.2 Test cycle. Establish the testing conditions set forth in
section 2 of this appendix. For clothes washers that do not lock out
any wash/rinse water temperature combination in the normal cycle,
skip section 3.2.5. For automatic clothes washers that lock out
certain wash/rinse temperature combinations in the normal cycle,
perform all tests in section 3.2 of this appendix.
* * * * *
4. In appendix J to subpart B of part 430, add new paragraphs 3.2.5
through 3.2.5.5 to read as follows:
3. Test Measurements
* * * * *
3.2.5 Hot water energy consumption testing for clothes washers
that lock out any wash/rinse temperature combinations in the normal
cycle.
3.2.5.1 For clothes washers that lock out certain wash/rinse
temperature combinations, perform additional tests on non-normal
cycles. Set the cycle selector to a non-normal cycle. Set the water
level selector at maximum fill and insert the appropriate test load,
if applicable. Activate the cycle of the clothes washer and also any
suds-saver switch. Set the wash/rinse temperature selector to the
hottest temperature combination setting that is locked out in the
normal cycle and repeat 3.2.2.3, 3.2.2.4, and 3.2.2.5.
3.2.5.2 Repeat 3.2.5.1 under the same temperature combination
setting for all other untested non-normal cycles on the machine.
3.2.5.3 Total the measured hot water consumption of wash, deep
rinse, and spray rinse of each non-normal cycle tested in 3.2.5.1
and 3.2.5.2 and compare. The cycle that has the highest hot water
consumption shall be the most energy intensive cycle for that
particular wash/rinse temperature combination setting.
3.2.5.4 Repeat 3.2.5.1 through 3.2.5.2 for all other wash/rinse
temperature combination selections that are locked out in the normal
cycle.
3.2.5.5 Set the water level selector at minimum fill and insert
the appropriate test load, if applicable. Activate the cycle of the
clothes washer and also any suds-saver switch. Repeat tests as
described in 3.2.5.1 through 3.2.5.4, except that minimum fill tests
are required only for the most energy intensive cycles as determined
during the maximum fill tests.
* * * * *
5. In appendix J to subpart B of part 430, paragraph 4.1 is revised
to read as follows:
4. Calculation of Derived Results from Test Measurements
4.1 Per-cycle temperature-weighted hot water consumption for
maximum and minimum water fill levels. Calculate the per-cycle
temperature-weighted hot water consumption for the maximum water
fill level, Vmax, expressed in gallons per cycle and defined
as:
[[Page 27446]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP24MY95.002
where:
Vi=Reported hot water consumption in gallons per-cycle at
maximum fill for each wash/rinse temperature selection, as recorded
in 3.3.2. (For clothes washers that lock out certain wash/rinse
temperature combinations, there will be ``Vi's'' for wash/rinse
temperature combination settings available in the normal cycle and
``Vi's'' for wash/rinse temperature combination settings in the
most energy intensive cycles.)
L=Lock out factor to be applied to the reported hot water
consumption.
L=1, used for the wash/rinse temperature combination settings
that do not lock out temperature selections in the normal cycle.
L=0.20, used for the locked out wash/rinse temperature
combination settings of the normal cycle. (This is used only for
clothes washers that lock out one or more wash/rinse temperature
selections in the normal cycle.)
L=0.80, used for the locked out wash/rinse temperature
combination settings of the most energy intensive cycles. (This is
used only for clothes washers that lock out one or more wash/rinse
temperatures selections in the normal cycle.)
TUFi=Applicable temperature use factor corresponding to wash/
rinse temperature selection as shown in 5 or 6.
n=For clothes washers that do not lock out any wash/rinse
temperature combinations in the normal cycle, n=the number of wash/
rinse temperature combination settings available to the user. For
clothes washers that lock out one or more temperature selections in
the normal cycle, n=the number of wash/rinse temperature combination
settings on the washers plus the number of wash/rinse temperature
combination settings that are locked out in the normal cycle.
TUFw=Temperature use factor for warm wash setting.
For clothes washers equipped with suds-saver feature:
X1=Frequency of use without suds-saver feature=.86.
X2=Frequency of use with suds-saver feature=.14.
For clothes washers not equipped with suds-saver feature:
X1=1.0
X2=0.0
SH=Fresh make-up water measured during suds-return cycle at
maximum water fill level.
Calculate the per-cycle temperature-weighted hot water consumption
for the minimum water fill level, Vmin, expressed in gallons
per cycle and defined as:
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TP24MY95.003
where:
Vj=Reported hot water consumption in gallons per cycle at
minimum fill for each wash/rinse temperature selection, as recorded
in 3.3.3. (For clothes washers that lock out certain wash/rinse
temperature combinations, there will be ``Vj's'' for wash/rinse
temperature combination settings available in the normal cycle and
``Vj's'' for wash/rinse temperature combination settings in the
most energy intensive cycle.)
L=As defined above.
TUFj=Applicable temperature factor corresponding to wash/rinse
temperature selection as shown in 5 or 6.
SL=Fresh 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.
* * * * *
6. The headings in paragraphs 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 of appendix J to
subpart B of part 430 are amended by removing the expressions (n=5),
(n=4), and (n=3), respectively.
[FR Doc. 95-12622 Filed 5-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
