Home/Federal/Federal Register/2021-26814

Proposed Rule2021-26814

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Automatic Commercial Ice Makers

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

December 21, 2021

Issuing agencies

Energy Department

Abstract

The U.S. Department of Energy ("DOE") proposes to amend the test procedure for automatic commercial ice makers ("ACIMs"; "ice makers") to update incorporated references to the latest version of the industry standards; establish relative humidity and water hardness test conditions; provide additional detail regarding certain test conditions, settings, setup requirements, and calculations; include a voluntary measurement of potable water use; clarify certification and reporting requirements; and add enforcement provisions. This notice of proposed rulemaking ("NOPR") also proposes to provide additional detail to the DOE test procedure to improve the representativeness and repeatability of the current ACIM test procedure. DOE is seeking comment from interested parties on the proposal.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 242 (Tuesday, December 21, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 21, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72322-72363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26814]

[[Page 72321]]

Vol. 86

Tuesday,

No. 242

December 21, 2021

Part II

Department of Energy

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Automatic Commercial
Ice Makers; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 86 , No. 242 / Tuesday, December 21, 2021 /
Proposed Rules

[[Page 72322]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431

[EERE-2017-BT-TP-0006]
RIN 1904-AD81

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Automatic
Commercial Ice Makers

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') proposes to amend the
test procedure for automatic commercial ice makers (``ACIMs''; ``ice
makers'') to update incorporated references to the latest version of
the industry standards; establish relative humidity and water hardness
test conditions; provide additional detail regarding certain test
conditions, settings, setup requirements, and calculations; include a
voluntary measurement of potable water use; clarify certification and
reporting requirements; and add enforcement provisions. This notice of
proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') also proposes to provide additional
detail to the DOE test procedure to improve the representativeness and
repeatability of the current ACIM test procedure. DOE is seeking
comment from interested parties on the proposal.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
proposal no later than February 22, 2022. See section V, ``Public
Participation,'' for details. DOE will hold a webinar on Monday,
January 24, 2022, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section V, ``Public
Participation,'' for webinar registration information, participant
instructions, and information about the capabilities available to
webinar participants. If no participants register for the webinar, it
will be cancelled.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons
may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2017-BT-TP-0006,
by any of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
(2) Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7d3c3e34304f4d4c4a292d4d4d4d4b3d181853393238531a120b">[email&#160;protected]</a>. Include the docket number
EERE-2017-BT-TP-0006 in the subject line of the message.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see section V of this document.
Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions
through a variety of mechanisms, including postal mail and hand
delivery/courier, the Department has found it necessary to make
temporary modifications to the comment submission process in light of
the ongoing corona virus 2019 (``COVID-19'') pandemic. DOE is currently
suspending receipt of public comments via postal mail and hand
delivery/courier. If a commenter finds that this change poses an undue
hardship, please contact Appliance Standards Program staff at (202)
586-1445 to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once the
Covid-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates
resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission,
including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts (if a public meeting is held),
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for
review at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. All documents in the docket are listed
in the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> index. However, some documents listed in the
index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public
disclosure, may not be publicly available.
The docket web page can be found at <a href="http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=53&action=viewlive">www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=53&action=viewlive</a>. The
docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents,
including public comments, in the docket. See section V for information
on how to submit comments through <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Stephanie Johnson, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1943. Email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b2f3c2c2dedbd3dcd1d7e1c6d3dcd6d3c0d6c1e3c7d7c1c6dbdddcc1f2d7d79cd6ddd79cd5ddc4">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-1777. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9fccfeedfef7b1ddeaebf3faeddff7eeb1fbf0fab1f8f0e9">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
For further information on how to submit a comment, review other
public comments and the docket, or participate in a public meeting (if
one is held), contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program
staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#773607071b1e1619141224031619131605130426021204031e1819043712125913181259101801">[email&#160;protected]</a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the
following industry standards into 10 CFR part 431:

Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
(``AHRI'') Standard 810-2016 with Addendum 1, ``Performance Rating
of Automatic Commercial Ice-Makers,'' approved January 2018; and
American National Standards Institute (``ANSI'')/American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(``ASHRAE'') Standard 29-2015, ``Method of Testing Automatic Ice
Makers,'' approved April 30, 2015.

Copies of AHRI standards can be obtained from the Air-Conditioning,
Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, 2111 Wilson Blvd., Suite 500,
Arlington, VA 22201, (703) 524-8800, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#64050c160d24050c160d0a01104a0b1603">[email&#160;protected]</a>, or <a href="http://www.ahrinet.org">http://www.ahrinet.org</a>.
Copies of ASHRAE standards can be purchased from the American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.,
1791 Tullie Circle, NE, Atlanta, GA 30329, (404) 636-8400,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f0918398829195b0918398829195de9f8297">[email&#160;protected]</a>, or <a href="http://www.ashrae.org">www.ashrae.org</a>.
For a further discussion of these standards, see section IV.M of
this document.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Scope
B. Definitions
1. Refrigerated Storage ACIM
2. Portable ACIM
3. Industry Standard Definitions
C. Industry Test Standards Incorporated by Reference
D. Additional Proposed Amendments
1. Low-Capacity ACIMs
2. Stability Criteria
3. Test Conditions
4. Test Setup and Equipment Configurations
5. Modulating Capacity Ice Makers
6. Standby Energy Use and Energy Use Associated With Ice Storage
7. Calculations and Rounding Requirements
8. Potable Water Use
E. Representations of Energy Use and Energy Efficiency
1. Sampling Plan and Determination of Represented Values
2. Test Sample Value Rounding Requirements
3. Enforcement Provisions
F. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact

[[Page 72323]]

2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
G. Compliance Date and Waivers
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
A. Participation in the Webinar
B. Submission of Comments
C. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

ACIMs are included in the list of ``covered equipment'' for which
DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards
and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(F)) DOE's energy conservation
standards and test procedures for ACIMs are currently prescribed at 10
CFR 431.136 and 10 CFR 431.134, respectively. The following sections
discuss DOE's authority to establish test procedures for ACIMs and
relevant background information regarding DOE's consideration of test
procedures for this equipment.

A. Authority

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title
IV, section 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for
Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions
designed to improve energy efficiency. This equipment includes ACIMs,
the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(F))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315),
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1)
Certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable
energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making representations about the
efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses
these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with
relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42
U.S.C. 6295(s))
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers
of Federal preemption for particular State laws or regulations, in
accordance with the procedures and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6316(b)(2)(D))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for
covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or
amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test
results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated
annual operating cost of a given type of covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle and requires that test procedures not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
EPCA prescribed the first Federal test procedure for ACIMs,
directing that the ACIM test procedure shall be the AHRI Standard 810-
2003, ``Performance Rating of Automatic Commercial Ice-Makers'' (``AHRI
Standard 810-2003''). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(7)(A)) EPCA requires if AHRI
Standard 810-2003 is amended, that DOE must amend the Federal test
procedures as necessary to be consistent with the amended AHRI
standard, unless DOE determines, by rule, published in the Federal
Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that to do so
would not meet the requirements for test procedures to be
representative of actual energy efficiency and to not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(7)(B)(i))
EPCA also requires that at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including ACIMs, to
determine whether amended test procedures would more accurately or
fully comply with the requirements for the test procedures to not be
unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test
results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated
operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(1))
In addition, if the Secretary determines that a test procedure
amendment is warranted, the Secretary must publish proposed test
procedures in the Federal Register and afford interested persons an
opportunity (of not less than 45 days' duration) to present oral and
written data, views, and arguments on the proposed test procedures. (42
U.S.C. 6314(b)) If DOE determines that test procedure revisions are not
appropriate, DOE must publish its determination not to amend the test
procedures. DOE is publishing this NOPR in satisfaction of the 7-year
review requirement specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))

B. Background

DOE's existing test procedures for ACIMs appear at Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (``CFR'') part 431, section 134.
In a January 11, 2012 test procedure final rule (``January 2012
final rule''), DOE satisfied its statutory obligation under 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(7)(B) to amend the ACIM test procedure by incorporating by
reference the following: AHRI Standard 810-2007 with Addendum 1 ``2007
Standard for Performance Rating of Automatic Commercial Ice Makers''
(``AHRI Standard 810-2007'') and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 29-2009 ``Method
of Testing Automatic Ice Makers,'' (including Errata Sheets issued
April 8, 2010 and April 21, 2010), approved January 28, 2009 (``ASHRAE
Standard 29-2009''). 77 FR 1591. Consistent with the updated AHRI
Standard 810-2007, the amended DOE test procedure provides for the
testing of equipment with capacities from 50 to 4,000 lb/24 h. The
updated DOE test procedure also (1) provides test methods for
continuous type ice makers and batch type ice makers that produce ice
types other than cubes, (2) standardizes the measurement of energy and
water use for continuous type ice makers with respect to ice hardness,
(3) clarifies the test method and reporting requirements

[[Page 72324]]

for remote condensing ice makers designed for connection to remote
compressor racks, and (4) discontinues the use of an energy use rate
calculation and instead references the calculation of energy use per
100 pounds of ice as specified in ASHRAE Standard 29-2009. Id. The
amended test procedure was required to be used for representations of
energy use beginning on January 7, 2013. Id.
On March 19, 2019, DOE published a Request for Information
(``RFI'') to solicit comment and information to inform DOE's
determination of whether to propose amendments to the current ACIM test
procedure. 84 FR 9979 (``March 2019 RFI''). DOE requested comment
regarding new versions of the industry standards that the current DOE
test procedure incorporates by reference; consideration of additional
specifications and amendments that may improve the accuracy of the test
procedure or reduce the testing burden on manufacturers; and any
additional topics that may inform DOE's decisions in a test procedure
rulemaking, including methods to reduce regulatory burden while
ensuring the procedure's accuracy. Id.
DOE received comments in response to the March 2019 RFI from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.

Table I.1--March 2019 RFI Written Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in this
Organization(s) NOPR Organization type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Howe Corporation................ Howe.............. Manufacturer.
Air-Conditioning, Heating, & AHRI.............. Trade Association.
Refrigeration Institute.
Appliance Standards Awareness Joint Commenters.. Energy Efficiency
Project (``ASAP''), Natural Organizations.
Resources Defense Council
(``NRDC''), Northwest Energy
Efficiency Alliance (``NEEA'').
Brema Group S.p.A............... Brema............. Manufacturer.
Hoshizaki America, Inc.......... Hoshizaki......... Manufacturer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

A parenthetical reference at the end of a quoted or paraphrased
comment provides the location of the item in the public record.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to consider
amended test procedures for ACIMs (EERE-2017-BT-TP-0006, which is
maintained at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail">www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail</a>;D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-
0006). The references are arranged as follows: (commenter name,
comment docket ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

In this NOPR, DOE proposes to update 10 CFR 429.45, ``Automatic
commercial ice makers;'' 10 CFR 429.134, ``Product-specific enforcement
provisions,'' 10 CFR 431.132, ``Definitions concerning automatic
commercial ice makers;'' 10 CFR 431.133, ``Materials incorporated by
reference;'' and 10 CFR 431.134, ``Uniform test methods for the
measurement of energy and water consumption of automatic commercial ice
makers'' as follows:

(1) Updating the referenced methods of test to AHRI Standard
810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, except for the provisions as
discussed;
(2) Including definitions and test requirements for low-capacity
ACIMs;
(3) Incorporating changes to improve test procedure
representativeness, accuracy, and precision, which include:
Clarifying calorimeter constant test instructions; specifying
ambient temperature measurement requirements; establishing a
relative humidity test condition; establishing an allowable range of
water hardness; clarifying the stability requirements that were
updated in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015; clarifying water pressure
requirements; and increasing the tolerance on capacity collection
time;
(4) Specifying certain test settings, conditions, and
installations, including: Clarifying ice hardness test conditions;
clarifying baffle use for testing; amending clearance requirements;
clarifying automatic purge control settings; and providing
instructions for testing ACIMs with automatic dispensers;
(5) Including voluntary provisions for measuring potable water
use;
(6) Including clarifying language for calculations, rounding
requirements, sampling plan calculations, and certification
instructions; and
(7) Adding language to the equipment-specific enforcement
provisions.

DOE's proposed actions are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the
current test procedure as well as the reason for the proposed change.

Table II.1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test Procedure Relative to
Current Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed test
Current DOE test procedure procedure Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
References industry standard Updates reference to Adopt latest
AHRI Standard 810-2007, industry standard industry standards.
which refers to ASHRAE AHRI Standard 810-
Standard 29-2009. 2016, which refers
to ASHRAE Standard
29-2015.
Scope includes ACIMs with Includes definitions Ensures
capacities between 50 and for low-capacity representative,
4,000 lb/24 h. ACIMs and expands repeatable, and
test procedure reproducible
scope to cover all measures of
ACIMs with performance for
capacities up to ACIMs currently not
4,000 lb/24 h; in scope.
includes additional
instructions to
allow for testing
low-capacity ACIMs.
Does not specify the ambient Specifies that the Harmonize with
& water temperature and harvested ice used industry standard;
water pressure when to determine the improves
harvesting ice to be used ice hardness factor representativeness,
in determining the ice must be produced at repeatability, and
hardness factor. the Standard Rating reproducibility.
Conditions
presented in
section 5.1.2 of
AHRI Standard 810-
2016.

[[Page 72325]]

Does not specify where to Specifies that the Improves
measure the temperature of temperature representativeness,
the ice block used to measurement repeatability, and
determine the calorimeter location must be at reproducibility.
constant. approximately the
geometric center of
the block of ice
and that any water
on the block of ice
must be wiped off
the surface prior
to placement in the
calorimeter.
Capacity measurements begin All cycles or Clarify industry TP
after the unit has been samples used for to reduce test
stabilized. the capacity test burden while
meet the stability maintaining
criteria. representative
results; harmonize
with industry
standard.
Continuous ACIMs shall be Continuous ACIMs Harmonizes with
considered stabilized when shall be considered industry TP update,
the weights of three stabilized when the but timing
consecutive 14.4-minute weights of two tolerance increased
samples taken within a 1.5- consecutive 15.0 by DOE to reduce
hour period do not vary by min <plus-minus>9.0 test burden while
more than <plus-minus>2 s samples having no maintaining
percent. more than 5 minutes representative
between the end of results.
a sample and the
start of the next
sample do not vary
more than <plus-
minus>2 percent or
0.055 pounds,
whichever is
greater.
Does not specify relative Adds relative Improves
humidity test condition. humidity test representativeness,
condition of 35 repeatability, and
<plus-minus>5.0 reproducibility.
percent.
Does not specify water Specifies that water Improves
hardness test condition. for testing must representativeness,
have a maximum repeatability, and
water hardness of reproducibility.
180 mg of calcium
carbonate per liter
of water (180 mg/L).
Use of baffles and purge Incorporates Improves
setting addressed in existing guidance representativeness,
guidance. into the test repeatability, and
procedure; allow reproducibility.
for an alternate
ambient measurement
location instead of
shielding the
thermocouple and
for rear clearances
which are less than
the required inlet
measurement
distance.
ACIMs shall be tested with a ACIMs shall be Improves
clearance of 18 inches on tested according to representativeness,
all four sides. the manufacturer's repeatability, and
specified minimum reproducibility and
rear clearances updates certain
requirements, or 3 requirements to
feet from the rear harmonize with
of the ACIMs, industry standard.
whichever is less;
all other sides of
the ACIMs and all
sides of the remote
condensers, if
applicable, shall
be tested with a
minimum clearance
of 3 feet or the
minimum clearance
specified by the
manufacturer,
whichever is
greater.
Does not specify use of Specifies that Improves
weighted/unweighted sensors unweighted sensors representativeness,
to measure ambient shall be used for repeatability, and
temperature. all ambient reproducibility.
temperature
measurements.
Does not specify how to Specifies that the Improves
measure water inlet water pressure representativeness,
pressure requirements. shall be measured repeatability, and
within 8 inches of reproducibility.
the ACIM and be
within the
allowable range
within 5 seconds of
water flowing into
the ACIM.
Does not specify how to Provides instruction In response to
collect capacity samples to test certain waiver.
for ACIMs with dispensers. ACIMs with an
automatic dispenser
with an empty
internal bin at the
start of the test
and to allow for
the continuous
production and
dispensing of ice,
with samples
collected from the
dispenser through a
conduit connected
to an external bin
one-half full of
ice.
Does not specifically Includes voluntary Harmonize with
reference potable water reference to industry standard;
usage. potable water use improves
in 10 CFR 431.134 representativeness,
based on AHRI 810- repeatability, and
2016. reproducibility.
Rounds energy use in Rounds energy use in Harmonize with
multiples of 0.1 kWh/100 lb multiples of 0.01 latest industry
and harvest rate to the kWh/100 lb; rounds standard; improves
nearest 1 lb/24 h. harvest rate to the representativeness,
nearest 0.1 lb/24 h repeatability, and
for ACIMs with reproducibility.
harvest rates of 50
lb/24 h or less.
Does not specify if Clarifies that the Improves
intermediate values used in calculations of representativeness,
calculations should be intermediate values repeatability, and
rounded. be performed with reproducibility.
raw measured data
and only the final
results be rounded;
clarifies that the
energy use,
condenser water
use, and potable
water use (if
voluntarily
measured) be
calculated by
averaging the
calculated values
for the three
measured samples
for each respective
metric.
Does not specify how to Specifies that the Improves
calculate the percent percent difference representativeness,
difference between two between two repeatability, and
measurements. measurements be reproducibility.
calculated by
taking the absolute
difference between
two measurements
and divide by the
average of the two
measurements.

[[Page 72326]]

References ``maximum energy Removes ``maximum'' Improves clarity.
use'' and ``maximum from the referenced
condenser water use'' at 10 terms; adds
CFR 429.45, no reference to reference to
water use in sampling plan. condenser water use
in sampling plan.
Defines ``cube type ice'' at Removes ``cube type Improves clarity.
10 CFR 431.132. ice'' from 10 CFR
431.132; removes
reference to cube
type ice in the
definition of
``batch type ice
maker''.
Does not specify how the The represented Improves
represented value of value of harvest representativeness,
harvest rate for each basic rate for the basic repeatability, and
model should be determined model is determined reproducibility.
based on the test sample. as the mean of the
harvest rate for
each tested unit.
Does not specify rounding Specifies that Improves
requirements for represented values representativeness,
represented values in 10 determined in 10 repeatability, and
CFR 429.45. CFR 429.45 must be reproducibility.
rounded consistent
with the test
procedure rounding
instructions, upon
the compliance date
of any amended
standards.
No equipment-specific The certified Improves clarity.
enforcement provisions. harvest rate will
be considered for
determination of
the maximum energy
consumption and
maximum condenser
water use levels
only if the average
measured harvest
rate is within five
percent of the
certified harvest
rate, otherwise the
measured harvest
rate will be used
to determine the
applicable
standards.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE has tentatively determined that while the proposed amendments
would introduce additional test requirements compared to the current
approach, the impact to the measured efficiency of certified ACIMs is
expected to be de minimis. Accordingly, DOE does not expect that
manufacturers would be required to re-test or re-certify existing ACIM
models as a result of the proposals in this NOPR. Additionally, for
low-capacity ACIMs, testing according to the proposed test procedure
would not be required until the compliance date of any energy
conservation standards for that equipment. DOE expects that any low-
capacity ACIM manufacturers currently making representations of energy
consumption are already doing so according to the existing DOE test
procedure, and similarly would not be required to re-test their
equipment according to the proposed test procedure. While DOE does not
expect that manufacturers would incur additional cost as a result of
the proposed test procedure, DOE provides a discussion of testing costs
in section III.F.1 of this NOPR. DOE has also tentatively determined
that the proposed test procedure would not be unduly burdensome to
conduct. Discussion of DOE's proposed actions are addressed in detail
in section III of this NOPR.

III. Discussion

In the following sections, DOE describes the proposed amendments to
the test procedures for ACIMs. This proposal reflects DOE's review of
the updates to the referenced industry test procedures and the comments
received in response to the March 2019 RFI and other relevant
information. DOE seeks input from the public to assist with its
evaluation of proposed amendments to the test procedures for ACIMs. In
addition, DOE welcomes comments on other relevant issues that may not
specifically be identified in this document.

A. Scope

DOE defines automatic commercial ice maker as ``a factory-made
assembly (not necessarily shipped in 1 package) that (1) consists of a
condensing unit and ice-making section operating as an integrated unit,
with means for making and harvesting ice; and (2) may include means for
storing ice, dispensing ice, or storing and dispensing ice.'' 10 CFR
431.132 (see also, 42 U.S.C. 6311(19)). The existing DOE test procedure
for ACIMs applies to both batch-type and continuous-type ice makers \4\
with harvest rates between 50 and 4,000 lb/24 h. DOE further subdivides
the batch-type and continuous-type equipment ACIM categories into
several distinct equipment classes based on the equipment
configuration, condenser cooling method, and harvest rate in pounds per
24 hours (lb/24 h), as shown in Table III.1. See also, 10 CFR
431.136(c) and (d). ACIM configurations include individual ice-making
heads, remote condensing equipment (both with and without a remote
compressor), and self-contained equipment. Ice-making heads and self-
contained equipment can be air- or water-cooled; however, DOE
prescribes standards only for remote condensing equipment that are air-
cooled. Self-contained ACIMs include a means for storing ice, while
ice-making heads and remote condensing equipment are typically paired
with separate ice storage bins. At 10 CFR 431.132, DOE defines these
related components, as well as several metrics related to ACIMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ A batch type ice maker is defined as an ice maker that has
alternate freezing and harvesting periods, including ACIMs that
produce cube type ice and other batch technologies. 10 CFR 431.132.
Batch type ice makers also produce tube type ice and fragmented ice.
A continuous-type ice maker is defined as an ice maker that
continually freezes and harvests ice at the same time. Id.
Continuous type ice makers primarily produce flake and nugget ice.

[[Page 72327]]

Table III.1--Summary of ACIM Equipment Classes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment configuration Condenser cooling Ice-making mechanism Harvest rate (lb/24 h)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ice-Making Head...................... Water.................. Batch.................. <300
>=300 and >850
>=850 and <1,500
>=1,500 and <2,500
>=2,500 and <4,000
-------------------------------------------------
Continuous............. <801
>=801 and >2,500
>=2,500 and >4,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air.................... Batch.................. <300
>=300 and >800
>=800 and <1,500
>=1,500 and <4,000
-------------------------------------------------
Continuous............. <310
>=310 and >820
>=820 and <4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remote-Condensing (but not remote Air.................... Batch.................. <988
compressor). >=988 and <4,000
-------------------------------------------------
Continuous............. <800
>=800 and <4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remote-Condensing and Remote Air.................... Batch.................. <930
Compressor. >=930 and <4,000
-------------------------------------------------
Continuous............. <800
>=800 and <4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Self-Contained....................... Water.................. Batch.................. <200
>=200 and <2,500
>=2,500 and <4,000
-------------------------------------------------
Continuous............. <900
>=900 and <2,500
>=2,500 and <4,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air.................... Batch.................. <110
>=110 and <200
>=200 and <4,000
-------------------------------------------------
Continuous............. <200
>=200 and <700
>=700 and <4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The regulatory and statutory definitions of ACIM are not limited by
harvest rate (i.e., capacity). (See 10 CFR 431.132 and 42 U.S.C.
6311(19), respectively.) However, the scope of DOE's test procedure is
limited explicitly to ACIMs with capacities between 50 and 4,000 lb/24
h. 10 CFR 431.134(a). DOE is aware of ACIMs available in the market
with harvest rates less than or equal to 50 lb/24 h (hereafter referred
to as ``low-capacity ACIMs'').
DOE had previously considered test procedures for low-capacity
ACIMs in a December 16, 2014 NOPR for test procedures for miscellaneous
refrigeration products. 79 FR 74894 (``December 2014 MREF Test
Procedure NOPR'').\5\ In a supplemental notice of proposed
determination regarding miscellaneous refrigeration products coverage,
DOE noted that a working group established to consider test procedures
and standards for miscellaneous refrigeration products made two
observations: (1) Ice makers are fundamentally different from the other
product categories considered as miscellaneous refrigeration products;
and (2) ice makers are covered as commercial equipment and there is no
clear differentiation between consumer and commercial ice makers. 81 FR
11454, 11456 (Mar. 4, 2016). In a 2016 final rule, DOE determined that
low-capacity ACIMs were significantly different from the other product
categories considered, and low-capacity ACIMs were not included in the
scope of coverage or test procedure for miscellaneous refrigeration
products. 81 FR 46773 (July 18, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ Available at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2013-BT-TP-0029-0011">www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2013-BT-TP-0029-0011</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the March 2019 RFI, the Joint Commenters supported
the establishment of a test procedure for low-capacity ACIMs, stating
that such a test procedure would ensure that information provided to
consumers about harvest rates and/or efficiency is based on a
standardized test method. They asserted that these smaller units could
likely be tested with a test procedure similar to the existing test
procedure for larger-capacity units. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at p. 1)

[[Page 72328]]

On December 8, 2020, DOE published an early assessment review for
amended energy conservation standards for miscellaneous refrigeration
products (``December 2020 MREF Standards RFI''). In response to the
December 2020 MREF Standards RFI, ASAP and NEEA supported establishing
standards for low-capacity ACIMs through the ACIM rulemaking.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ See documents number 4 and 7 available at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039-0001/comment">www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039-0001/comment</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the December 2014 MREF Test Procedure NOPR, DOE stated that it
is aware that manufacturers are using the DOE ACIM test procedure to
represent the energy use of consumer ice makers (i.e., low-capacity
ACIMs). 79 FR 74894, 74916. DOE also stated that it is unaware of any
test procedure that has been specifically developed for consumer ice
makers (i.e., low-capacity ACIMs). Id. DOE is still unaware of an
industry test procedure for testing and rating low-capacity ACIMs.
As stated previously, DOE is aware of low-capacity ACIM models
available on the market. The energy performance of these models is
typically either not specified or is based on the existing industry
test procedures. However, the lack of a DOE test procedure could allow
for manufacturers to make performance claims using other unknown test
procedures, which could result in inconsistent ratings from model to
model. Establishing a test procedure for low-capacity ACIMs would allow
purchasers to make more informed decisions regarding the performance of
low-capacity ACIMs as compared to the currently covered ACIM equipment,
if a low-capacity ACIM manufacturer chooses to make a representation of
energy efficiency or energy use. Low-capacity ACIMs are not currently
subject to DOE testing or energy conservation standards. As such,
manufacturers would not be required to test low-capacity ACIMs until
such time as DOE establishes energy conservation standards for such
equipment. Under the proposed test procedure, were a manufacturer to
choose to make representations of the energy efficiency or energy use
of a low-capacity ACIM energy, beginning 360 days after a final rule,
were DOE to finalize the proposal, manufacturers would be required to
base such representations on the DOE test procedure. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)) DOE is proposing test procedures for low-capacity ACIMs in
this NOPR.
Issue 1: DOE requests comment on the proposal to include test
procedure provisions for low-capacity ACIMs within the scope of the
ACIM test procedure.
Issue 2: DOE seeks information on whether there is an industry test
procedure for testing and rating low-capacity ACIMs. If so, DOE
requests information on how such a test procedure addresses (or could
address) the specific features of low-capacity ACIMs that are not
present in higher-capacity ACIMs, such that the test procedure produces
results that are representative of an average use cycle.

B. Definitions

As noted, 10 CFR 431.132 provides definitions concerning ACIMs. DOE
proposes new definitions to support test procedure amendments proposed
elsewhere in this document, as discussed in the following paragraphs.
1. Refrigerated Storage ACIM
Typical self-contained ACIMs have an ice storage bin that is
insulated but provides no active refrigeration. As a result, the ice
melts at a certain rate and the ice maker must periodically replenish
the melted ice. Conversely, some self-contained low-capacity ACIMs
feature a refrigerated storage bin that prevents melting of the stored
ice. Because of the additional refrigeration system components, ACIMs
with a refrigerated storage bin (i.e., refrigerated storage ACIMs) have
different energy use characteristics than ACIMs without refrigerated
storage. DOE is proposing amendments specific to refrigerated storage
ACIMs, as explained in Section III.D.1.b of this NOPR.
To effectively differentiate refrigerated storage ACIMs from ACIMs
with unrefrigerated storage bins, and to support the proposed test
provisions for refrigerated storage ACIMs, DOE proposes to add the
following definition to 10 CFR 431.132 for refrigerated storage ACIMs:
A ``refrigerated storage automatic commercial ice maker'' is an
automatic commercial ice maker that has a refrigeration system that
actively refrigerates the self-contained storage bin.
Issue 3: DOE requests comment on the proposed definition for
refrigerated storage automatic commercial ice maker.
2. Portable ACIM
Some low-capacity ACIMs are ``portable'' and do not require
connection to water supply plumbing to operate. Instead, these units
contain a reservoir that the user manually fills with water prior to
operation and must refill when it becomes empty. In the December 2014
MREF Test Procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to define ``portable ice maker''
as an ice maker that does not require connection to a water supply and
instead has one or more reservoirs that would be manually supplied with
water. 79 FR 74894, 74916. DOE noted that the lack of a fixed water
connection and the small size of these units contribute to their
portability. Id. DOE did not receive comments on the proposed
definition for portable ice makers in response to the December 2014
MREF Test Procedure NOPR.
In this NOPR, DOE proposes a definition for portable ice maker as
proposed in the December 2014 MREF Test Procedure NOPR, but with
additional specification that ACIMs with an optional connection to a
water supply line would not be considered portable ACIMs (i.e., a unit
would be considered portable if the water supplied to the unit is only
via one or more reservoirs). DOE proposes to add the following
definition to 10 CFR 431.132 for portable ACIMs:
``Portable automatic commercial ice maker'' means an automatic
commercial ice maker that does not have a means to connect to a water
supply line and has one or more reservoirs that are manually supplied
with water.
Issue 4: DOE requests comment on the proposed definition for
portable automatic commercial ice maker.
3. Industry Standard Definitions
In addition to the definitions specified at 10 CFR 431.132, the
current DOE test procedure at 10 CFR 431.134 references section 3,
``Definitions'' of AHRI Standard 810-2007, which includes many of the
same terms DOE defines at 10 CFR 431.132 and 10 CFR 431.134. To avoid
potential confusion regarding multiple definitions of similar terms,
DOE is proposing to clarify in 10 CFR 431.134 that where definitions in
AHRI Standard 810 conflict with those in DOE's regulations, the DOE
definitions take precedence.
AHRI Standard 810-2016 updated its definition of ``Energy
Consumption Rate'' to require expressing the rate in multiples of 0.01
kWh/100 lb of ice. To maintain consistency with the industry standard,
DOE is proposing to incorporate this same rounding requirement in its
definition of ``Energy use'' at 10 CFR 431.132 instead of the current
requirement of multiples of 0.1 kWh/100 lb of ice.
AHRI Standard 810-2016 also deleted its definition of ``Cubes Type
Ice Maker'' and replaced it with a definition of ``Batch Type Ice-
Maker.'' To be consistent with this industry update, DOE is proposing
to remove the

[[Page 72329]]

reference to cubes type ice maker in the definition of ``Batch type ice
maker'' in 10 CFR 431.132. DOE is also proposing to remove ``Cube type
ice'' from the list of DOE definitions at 10 CFR 431.132, consistent
with the industry standard update.
Issue 5: DOE requests comment on its proposal to amend 10 CFR
431.132 to revise the definitions of ``Batch type ice maker'' and
``Energy Use'' and delete the definition of ``Cube type ice,''
consistent with updates to AHRI Standard 810-2016. DOE also requests
feedback on the proposed clarification that the DOE definitions take
precedence over any conflicting industry standard definitions.
The following section discusses additional updates included in the
latest versions of the industry standards.

C. Industry Test Standards Incorporated by Reference

The existing DOE ACIM test procedure incorporates by reference AHRI
Standard 810-2007 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2009. 10 CFR 431.134(b). Since
publication of the January 2012 final rule, both AHRI and ASHRAE have
published new versions of the referenced standards. The most recent
versions are AHRI Standard 810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015
(reaffirmed in 2018). The 2018 reaffirmed version of ASHRAE Standard
29-2015 has no changes compared to the 2015 version of the standard.
DOE has reviewed the most recent versions of both AHRI Standard 810 and
ASHRAE Standard 29 and has compared the updated versions of these
industry standards to those currently incorporated by reference in the
ACIM test procedure.
The updates in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 provide additional
specificity to several aspects of the test method. In general, these
updates increase the precision and improve the repeatability of the
test method, but do not fundamentally change the testing process,
conditions, or results. In addition, ASHRAE made several grammatical,
editorial, and formatting changes to improve the clarity of the test
method. DOE summarizes these changes in Table III.2.

Table III.2--Summary of Changes Between ASHRAE Standard 29-2009 and
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE standard 29- ASHRAE standard 29-
Requirement 2009 2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Room Operations........ None................ No changes to the
test room shall be
made during
operation of the
ice maker under
test that would
impact the vertical
ambient temperature
gradient or the
ambient air
movement.
Temperature Measuring Accuracy of <plus- Accuracy and
Instruments. minus>1.0 [deg]F resolution of <plus-
and resolution of minus>1.0 [deg]F;
<=2.0 [deg]F. where accuracy
greater than <plus-
minus>1.0 [deg]F,
the resolution
shall be at least
equal to the
accuracy
requirement.
Harvest Water Collection.... None................ Harvest water shall
be captured by a
non-perforated pan
located below the
perforated pan.
Ice Collection Container ``Perforated pan, Requirements
Specification. bucket, or wire regarding water
basket'' and ``non- retention weight
perforated pan or and perforation
bucket''. size for perforated
pans and ``solid
surface'' for non-
perforated pan.
Pressure Measuring None................ Accuracy of and
Instruments. resolution of <plus-
minus>2.0 percent
of the quantity
measured.
Sampling Rate............... None................ Maximum interval
between data
samples of 5 sec.
Supply Water Temperature and <plus-minus>1 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F
Pressure. (water supply (water supply
temperature). temperature) and
``within 8 in. of
the ice maker . . .
within the
specified range''
(water pressure)
during water fill
interval.
Inlet Air Temperature Measure a minimum of Measure at a
Measurement. 2 places, centered location
1 ft from the air geometrically
inlet(s). center to the inlet
area at a distance
1 ft from each
inlet.
Clearances.................. 18 inches on all 3 ft or the minimum
sides. clearance allowed
by the
manufacturer,
whichever is
greater.
Stabilization Criteria...... Three consecutive Two consecutive 15.0
14.4 min samples min <plus-minus>2.5
(continuous) taken sec samples taken
within a 1.5 hr within 5 mins of
period or two each other within 2
consecutive batches percent or 0.055
(batch) do not vary lbs (continuous) or
by more than <plus- calculated 24-hour
minus>2 percent. ice production rate
from two
consecutive batches
within <plus-
minus>2 percent or
2.2 lb (batch).
Capacity Test Ice Collection Three consecutive Specifies that batch
14.4 min samples ice must be weighed
(continuous) or 30 <plus-minus>2.5
batches (batch). s after collection
and continuous ice
samples must be
within 5 mins of
each other.
Calorimetry Testing......... (1) Room temperature (1) Room temperature
is not specified. shall be within 65-
75 [deg]F during
the entire
procedure.
(2) To determine the (2) To determine the
calorimeter calorimeter
constant, 30 lbs of constant, add a
water must be added. quantity of water 5
times the mass of
ice (see #4 below).
(3) Rate of stirring (3) Rate of stirring
is described as is to be 1 <plus-
``vigorously''. minus>0.5
revolutions/second.
(4) To determine the (4) To determine the
calorimeter calorimeter
constant, 6 lbs of constant, add a
ice must be added. mass of ice between
50-200% of the
rated ice
production for a
period of 15
minutes of the ice
maker to be tested,
or 6 lbs, whichever
is less.
(5) The block of ice (5) The block of
is seasoned at room pure ice must reach
temperature. A an equilibrium
temperature temperature
measurement measured by a
location is not thermocouple
specified for the embedded in the
block of ice. interior of the
block and is free
of trapped water.
(6) To determine the (6) To determine the
calorimeter calorimeter
constant, it is not constant, continue
explicitly stated stirring after ice
to continue has disappeared for
stirring for 15 15 minutes.
minutes after the
ice has melted.

[[Page 72330]]

(7) The calorimeter (7) The calorimeter
constant shall be constant shall be
determined twice, determined, at a
at the beginning minimum, each time
and at the end of the temperature
the daily tests. measuring and
weighting
instruments are
calibrated or if
there is a change
to the container or
stirring apparatus.
(8) The calorimeter (8) The calorimeter
constant shall be constant must be
no greater than within 1.0-1.02.
1.02.
(9) To determine the (9) To determine the
net cooling effect, net cooling effect,
the water must stir the water for
stand in the 15 minutes prior to
calorimeter for 1 the addition of the
min before adding harvested ice.
harvested ice.
(10) Section 7.2.3 (10) Section 7.2.4
specifies that the specifies that the
ice sample used for ice sample used for
calorimetry testing calorimetry testing
shall be shall be
intercepted in a intercepted using a
manner similar to non-perforated
that prescribed in container,
Section 7.2.2 precooled to ice
(7.2.2 reads: temperature, and
Record the required collected from a
data (see Section stabilized ice
8).), except that maker over a time
the sample size period of 15 min or
shall be suitable until 6 lbs has
for the test. been captured.
Recorded Data............... Specifies 7 discrete Specifies that
elements be ambient temperature
recorded. gradient (at rest),
maximum air-
circulation
velocity (at rest),
and water pressure
must also be
recorded.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* AHRI Standard 810-2007 specifies the inlet water pressure of 30.0
<plus-minus>3.0 psig.

DOE also reviewed the updates to AHRI Standard 810-2016 and
identified the following revisions: New definitions for, among others,
ice hardness factor and potable water use rate; and an updated rounding
requirement for energy consumption rate (from 0.1 kilowatt hours per
100 pounds (``kWh/100 lb'') to 0.01 kWh/100 lb). The changes to AHRI
Standard 810-2016 are primarily clerical in nature and provide greater
consistency in the use of terms and specific definitions for those
terms.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on updating the DOE
test procedure to incorporate by reference the latest industry
standards--AHRI Standard 810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015.
Additionally, DOE requested comment on the benefits and burdens of
adopting any industry/voluntary consensus-based or other appropriate
test procedure.
Generally, commenters supported incorporating by reference the
latest industry standards. AHRI commented that incorporating the
current editions of ASHRAE 29 and AHRI 810 would capture the most
accurate and repeatable energy usage of ACIM in the marketplace today
and that the updates to the consensus standards produce accurate
results without unduly burdensome testing requirements for laboratories
or manufacturers. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 2) AHRI stated that testing burden
is most manageable when industry standards are implemented with
effective dates that allow manufacturers and testing facilities to
adjust and upgrade accordingly. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 9) AHRI also stated
that the industry committee weighs the potential improvement in testing
accuracy associated with tightening the tolerances and increasing the
instrumentation accuracies with the increase in testing burden and
costs. AHRI commented that the current process identified all of these
factors when considering each individual change to the standard. (AHRI,
No. 5 at p. 8)
Hoshizaki commented in support of updating the test procedure to
the most recent versions of AHRI 810 and ASHRAE 29 and does not support
incorporating any additional requirements. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 1)
Howe also commented in support of moving forward with the updates
to both AHRI 810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 to their current
released versions with changes as outlined in the March 2019 RFI,
stating that the updates to the standard will improve the accuracy of
the energy testing and will not increase testing burden. Howe also
warned that compulsory adoptions of revisions to AHRI and ASHRAE
standards could potentially favor the interests of the corporations
involved in the industry revisions process. Howe stated that confirming
any test procedure changes in DOE's rulemaking would ensure that all
ACIM manufacturers have an opportunity to participate in the adoption
of those changes. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 3)
DOE also compared the latest version of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 to
the requirements in the current DOE test procedure in 10 CFR 431.134.
These test methods specify different conditions for calorimetry testing
of continuous ice makers. Specifically, the current DOE test procedure
requires an ambient air temperature of 70 <plus-minus>1 [deg]F, with an
initial water temperature of 90 <plus-minus>1 [deg]F. 10 CFR
431.134(b)(2)(ii). ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 states in Appendix A3 that
room temperature shall be kept between 65 [deg]F and 75 [deg]F, and
that the water temperature is 20 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F above room
temperature.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE also noted that third-party test
laboratories have had difficulty achieving the calorimeter constant
value as specified in ASHRAE Standard 29-2009 (i.e., no greater than
1.02, and therefore also the requirements in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015,
in the range of 1.00 to 1.02), and that amended instructions regarding
the calorimeter constant may reduce testing burden while maintaining
the accuracy of the test procedure. 84 FR 9979, 9982.
In response to the March 2019 RFI, Hoshizaki commented that the
method used in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 to determine the calorimeter
constant is labor intensive but repeatable. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 1)
AHRI and Howe commented that manufacturers and third-party laboratories
that are currently testing in accordance with the updated industry
standard have been able to achieve repeatable results and have not seen
variance outside of the allowable range when using the updated industry
testing methods. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 3; Howe, No. 6 at p. 3) Howe also
opposed increasing the range of acceptable values for the calorimeter
constant for ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, stating that the calorimeter
constant has a direct relationship with the calculation of the ice
hardness from the net cooling effect test, and increasing the range of
acceptable values can result in inaccurate ice

[[Page 72331]]

hardness adjustment factors that will be applied to energy and
condenser water use, which would add significant uncertainty that
should be avoided. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 3)
Brema commented that DOE should define a common tool for
calorimetric verification to be performed as a preliminary check,
before beginning the energy consumption test. (Brema, No. 3 at p. 2)
Howe commented that DOE should discuss requiring a specific container
that is verified by third-party laboratories for calorimeter testing to
aid in consistency between testing facilities. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 3)
Howe noted that ice hardness values above 100 percent are possible
if ice produced by an ice maker is sensibly cooled after the phase
change is complete, and that in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, for example,
this would show a ``latent heat'' capacity above 144 Btu/lb because
there is not a calculation showing the sensible heat removed to sub-
cool the ice below its fusion temperature. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 4)
DOE has tentatively determined that the current ambient and water
condition requirements for calorimetry testing in the DOE test
procedure are appropriate because they provide more precise and
repeatable measurements than the tolerances described in ASHRAE
Standard 29-2015. Additionally, manufacturers have been meeting the
requirements to maintain 70 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F ambient air
temperature and 90 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F initial water
temperature for calorimetry testing as part of the current DOE test
procedure in 10 CFR 431.134. The current DOE test approach also is
consistent with the industry test standard requirements, i.e., a test
performed at the DOE required temperature conditions meets the
temperature conditions specified in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015. Therefore,
DOE is not proposing to amend the 70 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F
ambient air temperature and 90 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F initial
water temperature requirements for calorimetry testing. DOE is
proposing to explicitly provide that the harvested ice used to
determine the ice hardness factor be produced at the Standard Rating
Conditions specified in Section 5.2.1 of AHRI Standard 810-2016. These
conditions are provided in the industry standard, indicating that they
are currently used by manufacturers and therefore this clarification
would not change how manufacturers test. In response to Howe's comment,
this proposed approach accounts for the ice quality and corresponding
cooling effect for any ice samples, including those that may be sub-
cooled below 32 [deg]F.
Additionally, added specificity may be needed to accurately
determine the calorimeter constant. DOE has found that the lack of
specificity as to the location of the temperature measurement of the
block of pure ice may lead to variation in the resulting calorimeter
constant. Therefore, DOE is proposing to specify that the block of pure
ice, as specified in Section A2.e of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, is
measured by a thermocouple embedded at approximately the geometric
center of the interior of the block. Furthermore, DOE is proposing to
specify that any liquid water present on the block of ice must be wiped
off the surface of the block before placing the block into the
calorimeter.
In response to the March 2019 RFI comments, DOE is not proposing to
define specific test equipment for the calorimeter to allow
laboratories the flexibility to use available equipment and to avoid
the potential lack of availability of specific test equipment.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to adopt by reference AHRI Standard
810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 (note that AHRI Standard 810-2016
refers to ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 and not the 2018 re-affirmed version)
as the basis for DOE's ACIM test procedure, with additional proposed
provisions for calorimetry testing as discussed previously in this
section and the additional proposed provisions discussed in the later
sections of this NOPR.
As noted earlier in this section, the updates in ASHRAE Standard
29-2015 provide additional specificity to several aspects of the test
method. In general, these updates increase the precision and improve
the repeatability of the test method, but do not fundamentally change
the testing process, conditions, or results. Additionally, the changes
to AHRI Standard 810-2016 are primarily clerical in nature and provide
greater consistency in the use of terms and specific definitions for
those terms. Accordingly, DOE does not expect that the proposed
references to the updated industry standards would result in changes to
measured performance as compared to the existing test procedure.
Issue 6: DOE requests comment on its proposal to maintain the
current specifications of 70 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F ambient air
temperature and 90 [deg]F <plus-minus>1 [deg]F initial water
temperature for calorimetry testing. DOE also requests comment on its
proposal to clarify that the harvested ice used to determine the ice
hardness factor be collected from the ACIM under test at the Standard
Rating Conditions specified in Section 5.2.1 of AHRI Standard 810-2016.
Issue 7: DOE requests comment on its proposal to clarify that the
temperature of the block of pure ice, as specified in Section A2.e. of
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, is measured by a thermocouple embedded at
approximately the geometric center of the interior of the block. DOE
also requests comment on its proposal to clarify that any water that
remains on the block of ice must be wiped off the surface of the block
before placing the ice into the calorimeter.
Issue 8: DOE requests comment on its proposal to adopt by reference
AHRI Standard 810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, except for the
provisions for calorimetry testing as discussed previously, for all
ACIMs.

D. Additional Proposed Amendments

DOE conducted testing to identify whether ASHRAE Standard 29-2015
and AHRI Standard 810-2016 could potentially benefit from additional
detail and to investigate topics discussed in the March 2019 RFI. The
testing and initial findings are discussed along with any corresponding
proposed amendments in the following sections.
1. Low-Capacity ACIMs
DOE examined the comments received in response to the December 2014
MREF TP NOPR to consider what test method would be appropriate for low-
capacity ACIMs. During the December 2014 MREF TP NOPR public meeting,
True Manufacturing commented that there are very few differences
between ice makers with harvest rates less than 50 lb/24 h and those
with harvest rates greater than 50 lb/24 h. (Public Meeting Transcript,
No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0029-0014 at p. 31) Hoshizaki commented in response
to the December 2014 MREF TP NOPR that the ASHRAE 29 test needs to be
evaluated for accuracy for units that make less than 50 lb/24 h, as
they are outside the listed scope of the standard. (Hoshizaki, No.
EERE-2013-BT-TP-0029-0011 at p. 1)
DOE evaluated the provisions in its existing ACIM test procedure to
determine if any modifications are necessary to ensure the proposed
test method would provide representative and repeatable measures of
performance for low-capacity ACIMs and would not be unduly burdensome
to conduct. DOE also evaluated the provisions in AHRI Standard 810-2016
and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 to determine their applicability to low-
capacity ACIMs.
During investigative testing of batch type low-capacity ACIMs, DOE
observed that the ice collection container requirements in section
5.5.2(a) of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 may not be

[[Page 72332]]

appropriate for this equipment. Section 5.5.2(a) requires that the
collection container have a water retention weight that is no more than
1.0 percent of that of the smallest batch of ice for which the
container is used. For low-capacity batch type ACIMs, the weight of ice
in each batch is significantly lower than for other higher capacity
ACIMs. Accordingly, 1.0 percent of an individual batch represents a
very small weight for low-capacity ACIMs. For example, one such low-
capacity ACIM has a typical batch weight of 0.087 pounds; 1.0 percent
of that would be 0.00087 pounds, the equivalent of 0.080 teaspoons of
water. The water retention weight of a typical very small collection
container is approximately 0.0030 pounds. DOE was not able to identify
collection containers that would meet this threshold for the low-
capacity ACIMs with the lowest batch weights.
From its test sample, DOE determined that a water retention weight
of no more than 4.0 percent would allow for testing low-capacity ACIMs
with the lowest batch weights with a typical collection container.
Accordingly, DOE is proposing that the water retention requirement in
section 5.5.2(a) not apply to batch type low-capacity ACIMs, and
instead to require a water retention weight of no more than 4.0 percent
of the smallest batch of ice for which the container is used.
a. Portable ACIMs
For portable ACIMs, DOE has initially determined that some
provisions for measuring and maintaining inlet water conditions in
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 are not appropriate: i.e., sections 5.4, 5.6,
6.2 and 6.3. These sections include instrument specifications, test
conditions, and measurement instructions regarding inlet water flow,
pressure, and temperature. These sections are not applicable to
portable ACIMs because such equipment do not have a fixed water
connection, and therefore the conditions in these sections would not
provide representative conditions for portable ACIMs. Portable ACIMs
instead require that the fill reservoir be manually filled with a
maximum volume of water that is recommended by the manufacturer.
To determine typical operation and the corresponding need for
additional test procedure instructions regarding the water supply for
portable ACIMs, DOE conducted tests on portable ACIMs according to the
requirements of AHRI Standard 810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015,
except for sections 5.4, 5.6, 6.2, and 6.3 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015.
From this testing, DOE has initially determined that additional
instructions are needed regarding supply water characteristics and
filling the water reservoirs in portable ACIMs.
Section 5.2.1 of AHRI 810-2016 specifies an inlet water temperature
of 70.0 [deg]F for ACIM testing. Because portable ACIMs do not have a
continuous water supply, the water filled in the water reservoir is not
maintained at a constant temperature; the temperature may change after
the initial fill based on heat transfer with the ambient air and the
other components of the ACIM. Accordingly, DOE has initially determined
that specifying only the initial fill temperature of the water supplied
to the reservoir is most representative of typical use. DOE proposes to
establish the initial water temperature in a separate external
container before transferring the water to the water reservoir. In
DOE's experience, using an external container to establish and verify
the initial water temperature is significantly less burdensome than
measuring and adjusting the water temperature within the water
reservoir itself. Therefore, DOE proposes that the initial water
temperature condition be established in an external container and
verified by inserting a temperature sensor into approximately the
geometric center of the water in the external container. The initial
water temperature would be defined as 70 [deg]F <plus-minus>1.0 [deg]F,
consistent with the condition as specified in section 5.2.1 of AHRI
Standard 810-2016 and the tolerance as specified in section 6.2 of
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015.
Portable ACIM users may have an option of filling the reservoirs to
varying levels. To determine the appropriate fill level for testing,
DOE reviewed operating instructions for portable ACIMs available from a
range of manufacturers. DOE observed that the operating instructions
typically instruct the user to fill to the maximum specified level, or
to any level up to the maximum. To ensure repeatable and reproducible
test results, DOE has initially determined that filling the water
reservoir to the maximum volume of water as specified by the
manufacturer is representative of typical use. In addition, specifying
a consistent fill level for testing at the maximum fill level would
limit variability associated with reservoir water temperature and would
ensure the portable ACIM has sufficient water to conduct the test.
In summary, DOE proposes that portable ACIMs be subject to the test
procedure as proposed in this NOPR, except that sections 5.4, 5.6, 6.2,
and 6.3 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 would not apply. DOE proposes to
provide the following additional test instructions necessary for
testing portable ACIMs: Ensure that the ice storage bin is empty; fill
an external container with water; establish a water temperature in the
external container is consistent with the requirements of section 5.2.1
of AHRI Standard 810-2016 and the tolerance specified in section 6.2 of
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 (i.e., 70 [deg]F <plus-minus>1.0 [deg]F);
verify the water temperature in the external container by inserting a
temperature sensor into approximately the geometric center of the
water; after establishing water temperature, immediately transfer the
water to the portable ACIM reservoir and fill the reservoir to the
maximum level as specified by the manufacturer.
Issue 9: DOE requests comment on its proposal that portable ACIMs
be subject to the test procedure as proposed in this NOPR, except that
sections 5.4, 5.6, 6.2, and 6.3 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 do not
apply. DOE requests comment on its proposal that the potable water
reservoir be filled to the maximum level of potable water as recommend
by the manufacturer with an initial water temperature of 70 [deg]F
<plus-minus>1.0 [deg]F. DOE requests comment on its proposal that the
initial water temperature be established in an external container and
verified by inserting a temperature sensor into approximately the
geometric center of the water in the external container.
DOE has also initially determined that additional instructions are
needed for portable ACIMs to meet the requirements of section 6.6 of
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, which requires that ``bins shall be used when
testing and shall be filled one-half full with ice.'' Because section
6.6 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 does not specify how the bin would be
filled with ice, a laboratory may fill the ice storage bin one-half
full of externally produced ice (i.e., ice that was made by a separate
ACIM), for example to avoid waiting for the unit under test to produce
enough ice to fill the bin one-half full prior to initiating the start
of the test. Using externally produced ice does not directly affect the
performance of a non-portable ACIM because the conditions within the
ice storage bin do not have a direct impact on the incoming potable
water temperature.
In contrast, the conditions within the ice storage bin of a
portable ACIM do directly impact performance because portable ACIMs
typically recycle the melt water (at 32 degrees) from the internal ice
storage bin and combine it with water from the reservoir (initially at
70 degrees) to make additional ice.

[[Page 72333]]

Accordingly, any externally produced ice introduced to a portable ACIM
to fill the bin one-half full prior to testing could affect the
performance of the system during the test when compared to the tested
performance using ice produced by the portable ACIM under test.
To limit test variability that could occur due to the introduction
of externally produced ice, DOE proposes that for portable ACIMs, the
ice storage bin must be empty prior to the initial water fill, and the
unit under test must be operated to produce ice into the ice storage
bin until the bin is one-half full (i.e., precluding the use of
externally produced ice to fill the bin one-half full prior to
testing). DOE proposes to define one-half full as half of the vertical
dimension of the storage bin, based on the maximum possible fill level.
Once the ice storage bin is one-half full of ice, testing would proceed
according to section 7 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, consistent with non-
portable ACIM testing.
Issue 10: DOE requests comment on its proposal that portable ACIMs
have the ice storage bin empty prior to the initial reservoir fill and
then produce ice into the ice storage bin until the bin is one-half
full, at which point testing would proceed according to section 7 of
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015. DOE requests comment on its proposal to define
one-half full as half of the vertical dimension of the storage bin
based on the maximum ice fill level within the storage bin.
b. Refrigerated Storage ACIMs
DOE has initially determined that refrigerated storage ACIMs can be
tested according to the current DOE ACIM test procedure as well as AHRI
Standard 810-2016 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015. DOE investigated whether
additional specification was necessary to ensure that these test
methods would provide representative and repeatable results for
refrigerated storage ACIMs and would not be unduly burdensome to
conduct.
DOE identified two aspects of refrigerated storage ACIM testing
that may need further specification to limit variability: Door openings
for refrigerated storage ACIMs and refrigeration set point controls.
Door opening durations may affect the measured performance of
refrigerated storage ACIMs more than non-refrigerated storage ACIMs
because the refrigeration system provides cooling for the entire self-
contained storage bin rather than only for the ice making evaporator.
Thus, when opening the storage container door to collect ice from
refrigerated storage ACIMs, some portion of cold air from the storage
container will likely be replaced by higher temperature ambient air.
Both the duration and the extent of the door opening can contribute to
this air exchange within the storage container. Therefore, specifying
the duration and the extent of the door opening would limit variability
from test to test, thus promoting repeatable and reproducible test
results.
From investigative testing, DOE has determined that the process of
opening the bin door, carefully removing or replacing the ice
collection container, and closing the door can be readily performed in
under 10 seconds. DOE therefore proposes that for refrigerated storage
ACIMs, any storage bin door openings shall be conducted with the door
in the fully open position for 10 <plus-minus>1 seconds. DOE proposes
to specify that ``fully open'' means opened to an angle of not less
than 75 degrees (or to the maximum angle possible, if that is less than
75 degrees), which is consistent with the definition for fully open in
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2018, ``Method of Testing Open and Closed
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers.'' To ensure a consistent number
of door openings, DOE also proposes to specify that door openings would
occur only when collecting the ice sample and when returning the empty
collection container to the ice storage compartment (i.e., two separate
door openings per sample collection).
Issue 11: DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify that door
openings must only occur on self-contained refrigerated storage ACIMs
to collect samples after each cycle, and that the door shall be in the
fully open position for 10.0 <plus-minus>1.0 seconds to collect the
sample. DOE also requests comment on its proposal to specify that
``fully open'' means opening a door to an angle of not less than 75
degrees.
Refrigeration set point controls may also affect the measured
performance of refrigerated storage ACIMs, if the controls can be
adjusted by the user to maintain different storage compartment
temperatures. DOE investigated whether refrigerated storage ACIMs allow
the user to adjust the refrigeration set point of the ACIM and if so,
how. DOE reviewed user manuals for several refrigerated storage ACIMs
and found that the models either do not allow the user to adjust the
refrigeration set point, or have a factory preset temperature control
that can be adjusted by the user, but not in an easily accessible
manner (e.g., temperature control screws adjustable only with a
screwdriver or accessible behind grilles). The ability to adjust the
refrigeration set point on some refrigerated storage ACIMs does not
appear to be a setting that users would typically adjust and is likely
used only for troubleshooting. Based on this information, DOE proposes
that the refrigeration set point for testing a refrigerated storage
ACIM be consistent with section 4.1.4 of AHRI Standard 810-2016 (i.e.,
per the manufacturer's written instructions with no adjustment prior to
or during the test).
Issue 12: DOE requests comment on its proposal to test refrigerated
storage ACIMs consistent with section 4.1.4 of AHRI Standard 810-2016
(i.e., with adjustable temperature settings tested per the
manufacturer's written instructions with no adjustment prior to or
during the test). DOE requests comment on whether a specific
refrigeration set point or internal air temperature should be specified
for testing instead of the manufacturer's factory preset refrigeration
set point.
2. Stability Criteria
The current DOE test procedure, through reference to section 7.1.1
of ASHRAE Standard 29-2009, defines ACIM stability based on the harvest
rate. Specifically, continuous-type ice makers shall be considered
stabilized when the weights of three consecutive 14.4-minute samples
taken within a 1.5-hour period do not vary by more than <plus-minus>2
percent. Batch type ice makers are considered stable when the weights
from the samples from two consecutive cycles do not vary by more than
<plus-minus>2 percent.
Section 7.1.1 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 revised the stabilization
criteria to consider continuous-type ice makers stable when the weights
of two consecutive 15.0 minute <plus-minus>2.5 seconds samples do not
vary by more than the greater of <plus-minus>2 percent, or 0.055
pounds. Section 7.1.1. of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 specifies that batch
type ice makers are considered stable when the 24-hour calculated ice
production rate from samples taken from two consecutive cycles do not
vary by the greater of <plus-minus>2 percent or 2.2 pounds. Compared to
the 2009 version, ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 added absolute stability
criteria of 0.055 lb/15 minutes for continuous equipment and 2.2 lb/24
h for batch equipment.
In addition, ASHRAE Standard 29-2009 states that the unit must be
stable before the capacity tests are started. This provision was
changed in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, which instead states that the ice
maker must be stable for capacity test data to be valid. In
application, the stability provision in ASHRAE Standard 29-2009 means
that

[[Page 72334]]

any cycle or sample after the stability criteria is met is valid to be
used for the capacity test. DOE notes that the applicability of the
stability criteria in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 could be understood in
one of two ways: (1) Unchanged from ASHRAE Standard 29-2009, meaning
that any cycle or sample after the stability criteria are met is valid
to be used for the capacity test; or (2) the ice production rate for
each cycle used for the capacity test relative to any other cycle or
sample used for the capacity test must be within the greater of <plus-
minus>2 percent and 2.2 lb/24 h for batch type ice makers, and each
sample used for the capacity test must be within the greater of <plus-
minus>2 percent and 0.055 lb/15 mins for continuous ice makers. The
second interpretation limits potential variability compared to the
first interpretation because it puts specific limits on the variability
between cycles and samples to be used for the capacity tests. The
difference in the potential interpretations of the stability provisions
in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 could result in variation in capacity
ratings. Additionally, the second interpretation limits test burden by
not requiring separate cycles for meeting the stability criteria and
for testing performance. Under the second interpretation, the same
cycles are used to determine stability and performance. In this NOPR,
DOE proposes to expressly provide that the second interpretation be
used for determining stability, such that all cycles or samples used
for the capacity test are stable. DOE does not expect that this
proposal would impact ACIM performance as measured under the existing
test procedure as it would not substantively change the cycles required
for evaluating performance.
Section 7.1.1 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 added a requirement that
the duration of each sample for continuous type ice makers be 15.0
minutes <plus-minus>2.5 seconds. DOE testing indicated that removing
the plastic pan or bucket within the tolerance of <plus-minus>2.5
seconds can be difficult depending on the specific test setup (e.g.,
removing the container from the ice maker or bin without spilling ice).
An increased tolerance would reduce burden on manufacturers to test
continuous ice makers, while still sufficiently limiting the
variability between samples used for the capacity test to the criteria
proposed.
Therefore, DOE proposes to increase the tolerance to collect
samples for continuous ice makers from 15.0 minutes <plus-minus>2.5
seconds to 15.0 minutes <plus-minus>9.0 seconds. Increasing the
tolerance to 9.0 seconds could affect the weight of each sample;
however, variability would not increase because the samples used for
the capacity test would still need to meet the proposed stability
criteria. With the 9-second tolerance, the maximum and minimum
allowable collection times would vary by approximately 2 percent, which
is consistent with the allowable variation in capacity to determine
stability. DOE expects that this proposal would reduce the test burden
compared to the ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 approach and would ensure that
valid samples can be obtained. Additionally, DOE does not expect that
this proposal would affect measured performance as compared to the
existing test procedure because the sample collection period as
proposed is not substantively different from the existing test
procedure approach.
Issue 13: DOE requests comment on its interpretation of Section
7.1.1 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 and proposal to require that all
cycles or samples used for the capacity test meet the stability
criteria.
Issue 14: DOE requests comment on the proposal to increase the
tolerance for continuous ice makers to collect samples from 15.0
minutes <plus-minus>2.5 seconds to 15.0 minutes <plus-minus>9.0
seconds.
Section 7.1.1 of ASHRAE 29-2015 includes stabilization
requirements, which specify: (1) For continuous ACIMs, collected
weights must not vary by more than <plus-minus>2 percent or 25 g (0.055
lb), whichever is greater; or (2) for batch ACIMs, the calculated 24-
hour ice production rates must not vary by more than <plus-minus>2
percent or 1 kg (2.2 lb), whichever is greater.
Based on investigative testing, DOE observed that the absolute
stability criteria of 2.2 lb/24 h for batch type ice makers would not
necessarily represent stable operation for low-capacity batch ACIMs.
DOE conducted a market assessment and observed batch low-capacity ACIMs
with harvest rates as low as 7 lb/24 h. Based on this harvest rate of 7
lb/24 h, a 2.2 lb/24 h stability criteria could result in a harvest
rate variation of up to 31 percent (i.e., 2.2 lb/24 h divided by 7 lb/
24 h). Because of the potential high variability in the stability
criteria for low-capacity ACIMs, DOE proposes to not apply the absolute
stability criteria specified in ASHRAE 29-2015 to the proposed test
procedure for low-capacity ACIMs.
DOE also considered whether applying only the <plus-minus>2 percent
stability criterion would be appropriate for low-capacity ACIMs. Due to
the lower overall ice harvest rates, a 2 percent stability requirement
represents much smaller weight variations for low-capacity ACIMs. For
example, a 2 percent stability requirement for the 7 lb/24 h model
represents a variation of 0.14 lb/24 h, which may be difficult to
achieve for low-capacity ACIMs.
The 2 percent stability requirement is also not currently
applicable to the lowest capacity ACIMs currently in scope for the DOE
test procedure (as described, the requirement is 2 percent or 2.2 lb/24
h, whichever is greater). Accordingly, the effective stability
requirement for the lowest capacity ACIMs currently in scope is
approximately 4 percent (i.e., 2.2 lb/24 h divided by 50 lb/24 h). DOE
has initially determined that applying this same percentage (i.e., 4
percent) as the low-capacity ACIM stability requirement would be more
appropriate than applying either the 2 percent or 2.2 lb/24 h stability
requirements currently defined in Section 7.1.1 of ASHRAE 29-2015. DOE
has observed through testing that low-capacity ACIMs are able to
achieve stability based on a 4 percent requirement.
Therefore, for consistency (on a percentage basis) with the
existing test requirements for small ACIMs currently in scope and to
limit test burden, DOE proposes to require a <plus-minus>4 percent
stability criterion (without an absolute stability criterion) for
testing low-capacity ACIMs.
Issue 15: DOE requests comment on the proposal to require that all
cycles or samples of low-capacity ACIMs used for the capacity test meet
a <plus-minus>4 percent stability criterion and not be subject to an
absolute stability criterion.
3. Test Conditions
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on potential
modifications to the existing standard test conditions, and whether any
modifications would improve the accuracy of the test procedure or
reduce testing burden. 84 FR 9979, 9984.
Hoshizaki commented that tightening the tolerances for testing
would place an undue burden on manufacturers, pointing out that if the
tolerance is tightened outside of the manufacturer's existing
equipment, it would entail buying new equipment and introduce higher
calibration costs for such equipment. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2) Howe
stated that because equipment is readily available to achieve tighter
tolerances, this change would not place an undue burden on
manufacturers or third-party testing sites. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 13)
DOE discusses the potential changes to test conditions, including
tolerances and instrumentation accuracies, in the following sections.

[[Page 72335]]

a. Relative Humidity
Variation in the moisture content of ambient air may affect the
energy consumption of ice makers. However, neither the current DOE test
procedure, nor AHRI 810-2016 or ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 include
requirements to control for moisture content for testing. In contrast,
industry test standards for other refrigeration equipment, such as
commercial refrigerators, freezers and refrigerator-freezers (``CRE'')
and refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines
(``BVMs''), have requirements for the moisture content.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on how moisture
content of ambient air impacts ACIM performance. 84 FR 9979, 9984. In
addition, DOE requested information regarding the burden of specifying
a humidity range during testing. Id.
AHRI, Howe, and Hoshizaki stated that specifying a set humidity for
testing would show a negligible effect for energy testing in ice
makers, as the physics of an ice maker naturally involve the machine
performing in a humid atmosphere for the freezing and harvesting of
ice. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 5; Howe, No. 6 at p. 9; Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p.
2) Hoshizaki commented that any discussion of humidity or temperatures
for testing of ice makers should be handled through the ASHRAE 29
standard committee. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2)
The Joint Commenters noted that test procedures for other
refrigeration equipment specify standard conditions for relative
humidity and wet bulb temperature, and that including these
specifications would improve the repeatability and reproducibility of
the test procedure by ensuring that similar conditions are being used
across test laboratories. Furthermore, the Joint Commenters stated that
specifying these standard conditions would prevent manufacturers from
testing at conditions that may improve ratings but not be
representative of typical field performance. (Joint Commenters, No. 2
at p. 3)
DOE tested three ACIMs in a test chamber with relative humidity at
35, 55 and 75 percent at the standard rating conditions to investigate
the effect of relative humidity on energy use. Table III.3 summarizes
the results of this testing.

Table III.3--Comparison of Energy Use Rates at Different Relative Humidity Test Conditions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Difference from Difference from
35% relative 75% relative 35% relative 35% relative
Test unit Type humidity (kWh/ 55% relative humidity (kWh/ humidity (kWh/ humidity to 55% humidity to 75%
100 lb) 100 lb) 100 lb) relative relative
humidity (%) humidity (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................... Batch................. 8.27 8.28........................ 8.28 +0.2 +0.2
2......................... Batch................. 8.47 10.49....................... 11.47 +24 +35
3......................... Continuous............ 4.27 Not Tested.................. 4.43 N/A +4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These results show a wide range of impacts on performance among the
three tested units when relative humidity is varied. Test Unit 1 showed
little impact in performance between the two relative humidity test
conditions. Whereas, Test Unit 2 showed the greatest variation in
performance, with the 55 percent relative humidity test condition
resulting in 24 percent greater energy use than the 35 percent relative
humidity test condition. Test Unit 3 showed a modest increase in energy
use of 4 percent between the 35 percent and 75 percent relative
humidity conditions. (Test Unit 3 was not tested at the 55 percent
relative humidity condition). DOE has been unable to determine why Test
Unit 2 showed significantly greater variation in performance compared
to the other test units. Nevertheless, based on these results showing
that different relative humidity conditions can result in a wide
variation in performance, DOE proposes to specify a relative humidity
test condition to ensure repeatable and reproducible test results.
DOE investigated what relative humidity condition would be most
appropriate for testing ACIMs. Due to a lack of data regarding typical
relative humidity levels for ACIM installations, DOE considered
relative humidity conditions used for testing other types of commercial
kitchen equipment, such as commercial refrigeration equipment
(``CRE''), refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines
(``BVMs''), and refrigerated buffet and preparation tables.
The industry test standard for CRE has a requirement to maintain
wet-bulb temperature, and the industry test standard for BVM requires
that relative humidity be controlled. The relative humidity
requirements in the industry standards for CRE and BVM are codified in
the current DOE test procedures in Appendix B to Subpart C of 10 CFR
431 and Appendix B to Subpart Q of 10 CFR 431, respectively. ASTM
Standard F2143-2016, ``Performance of Refrigerated Buffet and
Preparation Tables,'' also includes relative humidity requirements.
Based on a review of the test conditions for these other types of
commercial food service equipment, DOE is proposing to require a
relative humidity of 35 percent for ACIM testing, as discussed further
in the following paragraphs. DOE summarizes the other commercial food
service equipment test condition requirements along with the proposal
for ACIMs in Table III.4.

Table III.4--Comparison of Relative Humidity Test Conditions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corresponding
Ambient Relative moisture
Equipment type Test standard temperature Wet bulb temperature humidity content (lbs
([deg]F) ([deg]F) (percent) water vapor/
lbs dry air)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Refrigeration Equipment.. ASHRAE 72-2005 [dagger].................. 75.2 64.4................... * 55 0.010
Refrigerated Beverage Vending ASHRAE 32.1-2010 [dagger]................ 75 No requirement......... 45 0.008
Machines.
Refrigerated Buffet and Preparation ASTM Standard F2143-2016................. 86 No requirement......... 35 0.009
Tables.

[[Page 72336]]

Automatic Commercial Ice Makers..... Proposed................................. 90 No requirement......... ** 35 0.011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The relative humidity for commercial refrigeration equipment is calculated from the dry bulb temperature and the wet bulb temperature using a pressure
of 760 mm of mercury.
** Proposed test condition.
[dagger] The test conditions currently incorporated by refence in the DOE test procedures are unchanged in the most recent versions of the industry
standards, ASHRAE 72-2018 and ASHRAE 32.1-2017.

DOE has initially determined that establishing a relative humidity
test condition at 35 percent would be appropriate for testing ACIMs. A
relative humidity of 35 percent would maintain a moisture content
similar to the moisture content required in the current DOE test
procedures for BVMs and CRE, and the industry test standard for
refrigerated buffet and preparation tables. Controlling to 35 percent
relative humidity would also limit potential test burden on any ACIM
manufacturers that already test and control conditions for the other
refrigerated equipment types. DOE is proposing that the relative
humidity be maintained and measured at the same location used to
confirm ambient dry bulb temperature, or as close as the test setup
permits.
DOE also investigated appropriate tolerances on relative humidity.
DOE measured and controlled the relative humidity in the test chamber
for all tests. DOE observed that relative humidity in the test chamber
can vary from the set point during ACIM testing. The largest variation
in relative humidity observed in the test chamber, typically by three
percentage points, occurred when a self-contained unit was opened to
remove and measure the weight of the ice. When the unit was closed, the
relative humidity in the test chamber returned to the set level.
DOE considered a test condition tolerance and test operating
tolerance on relative humidity. A test condition tolerance is a
tolerance that is calculated based on the average of all relative
humidity measurements during each freeze cycle. In contrast, a test
operating tolerance would apply to all individual measurement during
each cycle. The industry standards referenced in Table III.4, ASHRAE
72-2018, ASHRAE 32.1-2017, and ASTM Standard F2143-2016, all require a
test condition tolerance. ASHRAE 72-2018 is the only standard mentioned
in Table III.4 that also requires a test operating tolerance. To be
consistent with the other commercial food service equipment standards,
DOE proposes to add a test condition tolerance on the proposed relative
humidity test condition of 35 percent.
To establish an appropriate test condition tolerance on relative
humidity, DOE first investigated typical accuracies of relative
humidity sensors. Accuracies of <plus-minus>2.0 percent are typical for
relative humidity sensors. Additionally, DOE's test procedure for BVMs
requires a relative humidity instrument accuracy of <plus-minus>2.0
percent. See section 1.1 of Appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR 431.
Similarly, section 6.3 of ASTM Standard F2143-2016 also requires a
relative humidity instrument accuracy of <plus-minus>2.0 percent. A
tolerance lower than the instrument measurement accuracy cannot be
captured by such an instrument. Therefore, a system with an accuracy of
2 percent cannot measure a tolerance below 2 percent. To ensure that
controlling for relative humidity in the test chamber is not unduly
burdensome, DOE proposes to require a relative humidity instrument
accuracy of <plus-minus>2.0 percent and to include a test condition
tolerance on relative humidity of <plus-minus>5.0 percent. This is
consistent with the tolerances included for relative humidity in ASTM
Standard F2143-2016 and the BVM test procedure, and similar to the
equivalent tolerance on wet bulb temperature for CRE testing. DOE's
testing, including for the other equipment with similar tolerances, has
shown that test laboratories are able to maintain relative humidity
within the proposed test condition tolerance of <plus-minus>5.0
percent.
Although a relative humidity requirement is not currently specified
in the existing test procedure, DOE does not expect the proposal to
affect measured performance of existing ACIM models. As discussed, the
test procedures for other refrigeration equipment require testing to an
ambient humidity level consistent with that proposed for ACIMs in this
NOPR. Additionally, the test facilities required to maintain the
necessary ambient test temperature likely already implement humidity
controls and DOE expects that existing tests would have been conducted
in an ambient relative humidity within the proposed range, despite it
not being a requirement in the current test procedure. Accordingly, DOE
expects that the proposal would ensure repeatable and reproducible test
results, but would not impact measured performance as compared to the
existing test procedure.
Issue 16: DOE requests comment on the proposal to control relative
humidity at 35 <plus-minus>5.0 percent. Specifically, DOE requests
comment on the representativeness of 35 percent relative humidity in
field use conditions, whether manufacturers currently control and
measure relative humidity for ACIM testing (and if so, the conditions
used for testing), and the burden associated with controlling relative
humidity within a tolerance of <plus-minus>5.0 percent.
b. Water Hardness
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 and AHRI Standard 810-2016 do not specify
the water hardness of the water supply used for testing. The United
States Geological Survey (``USGS'') defines water hardness as the
concentration of calcium carbonate in milligrams per liter (``mg/L'')
of water and lists general guidelines for the classification of water
hardness as 0 to 60 mg/L of calcium carbonate for soft water; 61 to 120
mg/L of calcium carbonate for moderately hard water; 121 to 180 mg/L of
calcium carbonate for hard water; and more than 180 mg/L of calcium
carbonate for very hard water.\7\ In the January 2012 final rule, DOE
stated that harder water depresses the freezing temperature of water
and results in increased energy use to produce the same quantity of
ice. 77 FR 1591, 1605. DOE also stated that hard water (i.e., water
with a higher concentration of calcium carbonate) can affect energy
consumption in the field due to increased scale build up on the heat
exchanger surfaces over time, and the use of higher water purge
quantities to help flush out dissolved solids to

[[Page 72337]]

limit scale build up. Id. However, DOE declined to set requirements for
water hardness for testing because of insufficient information to allow
proper consideration of such a requirement. Specifically, DOE did not
have information regarding the impact of variation in water hardness on
as-tested performance of ACIMs, and therefore could not justify the
additional burden associated with establishing a standardized water
hardness requirement at that time. 77 FR 1591, 1605-1606.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ See <a href="http://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/hardness-water?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objectswater.usgs.gov/owq/hardness-alkalinity.html">www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/hardness-water?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objectswater.usgs.gov/owq/hardness-alkalinity.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on the impact of water
hardness on ACIM performance and on the burden associated with
controlling for water hardness during testing. 84 FR 9979, 9984-9985.
In response to the March 2019 RFI, the Joint Commenters stated that
DOE should specify a value for water hardness in the test procedure
that is representative of typical field conditions because water
hardness may affect measured energy. They further commented that
specifying such a requirement would improve repeatability and
reproducibility and would also prevent manufacturers from testing using
a water hardness that may improve ratings but not be representative of
typical field performance. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at p. 3)
Hoshizaki commented that testing with a certain water hardness
would not be economically feasible for manufacturers and that any
discussion about how to incorporate such a requirement without undue
burden on manufacturers would be best addressed in the ASHRAE 29
standard committee. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2)
AHRI and Howe stated that the amount of total dissolved solids can
have an impact on energy and water consumption, but the level of the
impact is difficult to ascertain and is most likely insignificant under
standard testing conditions on new ACIMs with clean evaporators. (AHRI,
No. 5 at p. 6; Howe, No. 6 at p. 10) Brema commented that water
hardness should be set to be in the range of the user manual and
potability regulations. (Brema, No. 3 at p. 7)
DOE conducted testing to investigate whether changing the water
hardness could affect the energy consumption and harvest rate of ACIMs.
Testing was conducted on new models (i.e., with clean evaporators prior
to accumulation of any significant scale). DOE conducted water hardness
tests on two batch type ice makers and one continuous type ice maker.
According to the United States Geological Survey (``USGS''), the
vast majority of water hardness in the United States ranges from 0 mg/L
to 250 mg/L of calcium carbonate.\8\ Given the range of water hardness
in the United States, DOE used a water hardness of 42 mg/L of calcium
carbonate for a ``soft water'' test (which also represented water
readily available at the test facility) and a water hardness of 342 mg/
L of calcium carbonate for a ``very hard water'' test (i.e., a 300 mg/L
increase relative to the soft water test to represent an extreme
comparison case). DOE tested four ACIMs in a test chamber with soft and
very hard water hardness at the standard rating conditions to
investigate the effect of water hardness on harvest rate and energy
use. The results of these tests are summarized in Table III.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ See <a href="http://www.usgs.gov/media/images/map-water-hardness-united-states">www.usgs.gov/media/images/map-water-hardness-united-states</a>.

Table III.5--ACIM Performance Differences of Soft Water Compared to Very Hard Water
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harvest rate Harvest rate Energy use Energy use
Unit Type with soft with very hard Difference with soft with very hard Difference
water * water * (%) water * water * (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................ Batch.................... 95 105 11 10.49 9.43 -10.1
2............................ Batch.................... 126 131 4 8.28 7.96 -3.9
3............................ Batch.................... 351 359 2.3 5.73 5.64 -1.6
4............................ Continuous............... 562 582 3.4 4.40 4.18 -5.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Soft Water was 42 mg/L of calcium carbonate during testing. Very Hard Water was 342 mg/L of calcium carbonate during testing.

These test results show that water hardness can impact measured
harvest rates and energy consumption rates, and that very hard water
generally resulted in more favorable performance than soft water. DOE
acknowledges that the observed test results show the opposite impact on
performance than expected and discussed in the January 2012 final rule
(i.e., that harder water would be expected to increase energy
consumption).
Given that the performance of the tested ACIMs improved with harder
water, to limit the potential for testing under favorable conditions
not necessarily representative of typical operation, DOE proposes to
require that water used for testing have a maximum hardness of 180 mg/L
of calcium carbonate. According to the USGS, a majority of the U.S. has
ground water with a water hardness equal to or below 180 mg/L of
calcium carbonate.\9\ Establishing a maximum water hardness of 180 mg/L
would ensure that ACIMs are tested with water that is not considered
``very hard'' according to the USGS and that the tested water hardness
is within a range representative of water hardness that ACIMs are
likely to experience in actual use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ See <a href="http://water.usgs.gov/owq/hardness-alkalinity.html">water.usgs.gov/owq/hardness-alkalinity.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE proposes that water hardness must be measured using a water
hardness meter with an accuracy of <plus-minus>10 mg/L or taken from
the most recent version of the water quality report that is sent by
water suppliers, which is updated at least annually and is accessible
at: <a href="http://ofmpub.epa.gov/apex/safewater/f?p=136:102">ofmpub.epa.gov/apex/safewater/f?p=136:102</a>. DOE expects that any
test facilities in locations with water supply hardness greater than
180 mg/L would likely already incorporate water softening controls, and
therefore this proposal is not expected to require updates to existing
test facilities. For this same reason, DOE does not expect that this
proposal would impact rated performance for any ACIMs tested under the
current DOE test procedure.
DOE also notes that this proposal does not conflict with any
provisions of the industry test and rating standards and would provide
additional specifications to ensure the representativeness of the
results and improve the repeatability and reproducibility of the test
results.
Issue 17: DOE requests comment on its proposal that water used for
ACIM testing have a maximum water hardness of 180 mg/L of calcium
carbonate and on whether any test facilities would not have water
hardness supplied within the proposed allowable range. If there are
such test facilities, DOE requests comment on whether the supply water
is softened when testing ACIMs and, if

[[Page 72338]]

the water is not softened, the burden associated with implementing
controls for water hardness. Additionally, while DOE is proposing that
this requirement apply to all water supplied for ACIM testing, DOE
requests information on whether this requirement should only be
applicable to potable water used to make ice (and not any condenser
cooling water).
c. Ambient Temperature Gradient
The current ACIM test procedure incorporates by reference section
5.1.1 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2009, which stipulates that, with the ice
maker at rest, the vertical ambient temperature gradient in any foot of
vertical distance from 2 inches above the floor or supporting platform
to a height of 7 feet above the floor, or to a height of 1 foot above
the top of the ice maker cabinet, whichever is greater, shall not
exceed 0.5 [deg]F/foot. This language, which is consistent with the
requirement in section 5.1.1 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, is consistent
with the test room requirements for residential refrigerators, as
specified in section 7.2 of ANSI-AHAM Standard HRF-1-1979, ``Household
Refrigerators, Combination Refrigerator-Freezers, and Household
Freezers'' (ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-1979), the version of the AHAM standard
that was incorporated by reference in the DOE test procedure for
residential refrigerators in a final rule published August 10, 1982. 47
FR 34517. DOE modified the requirements associated with temperature
gradient for residential refrigerators, in a final rule published April
21, 2014, to remove the reference to a 7 feet height requirement and
require only that the gradient be maintained to a height 1 foot higher
than the top of the unit. 79 FR 22320, 22335.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on how manufacturers
are demonstrating compliance with the requirements of section 5.1.1 of
ASHRAE Standard 29-2009.
AHRI commented that manufacturers confirm compliance of test rooms
or cells used for testing with all standards requirements, and that the
standard committee and manufacturers deemed the requirements within the
method of test to be adequate. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 7)
Hoshizaki commented that it confirms the compliance of the test
room with the requirements before testing, and that there is no need to
align the ACIM temperature gradient requirements with other standards
because ice makers perform differently than other commercial
refrigeration appliances. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2)
Howe commented that DOE should consider changing the requirement to
limit the temperature measurement to 1 foot above the unit because
there are no standard heights for test setups and units, so this change
would ensure that the standard is consistent across installations.
(Howe, No. 6 at p. 12)
Because DOE did not receive information indicating that a
modification to the existing requirements would improve test accuracy
or decrease test burden, DOE is not proposing any changes to the
ambient temperature gradient requirements. DOE agrees that there are no
standard heights for test setups and units; however, the current
requirements ensure that the temperature gradient is maintained to at
least within 1 foot above the unit under test for all test setups.
Issue 18: DOE requests comment on maintaining the existing ambient
temperature gradient requirements, through an updated reference to
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015, and on whether any modifications would improve
test accuracy or decrease test burden.
d. Ambient Temperature and Water Temperature
The current DOE ACIM test procedure incorporates by reference AHRI
810-2007, which specifies an ambient temperature of 90 [deg]F and a
supply water temperature of 70 [deg]F. AHRI 810-2016 provides the same
specifications. However, many ice makers may be installed in
conditioned environments such as offices, schools, hospitals, hotels,
and convenience stores (see 80 FR 4646, 4700 (Jan. 28, 2015)), which
may have ambient air temperatures and supply water temperatures higher
or lower than those specified in AHRI Standard 810.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on whether the ambient
air temperature and water supply temperature specified in AHRI Standard
810-2016, and in the current DOE test procedure, are appropriately
representative of those temperatures during an average use cycle or
whether different temperature specifications should be considered. 84
FR 9979, 9985. In particular, DOE requested data and information
describing the ambient air temperature and supply water temperature of
different applications at which ACIM equipment are operated. Id.
The Joint Commenters and Brema raised concerns about the
representativeness of current ambient temperature conditions, stating
that many ice makers are installed in conditioned spaces with ambient
temperatures closer to 70 [deg]F. They commented that this would mean
that efficiency ratings are not providing appropriately representative
information to purchasers, although neither commenter submitted
information or data as to actual field conditions. (Joint Commenters,
No. 2 at p. 3; Brema, No. 3 at p. 8) The Joint Commenters further
commented that DOE should consider testing ice makers at two sets of
ambient temperature and supply water temperature conditions because
there is likely a significant range of temperatures in the field
reflecting different locations and applications. (Joint Commenters, No.
2 at p. 4)
Howe commented that lowering the ambient test temperature without
the proper energy accounting will lead customers to choose less energy
efficient options from a complete system perspective, because such
units are assumed to be within a climate-controlled space. Howe stated
that DOE must maintain the test conditions of 90 [deg]F ambient and 70
[deg]F inlet water temperature because the inlet water temperature is
representative of the average worst-case supply water that can be seen
within the United States, and the ambient temperature ensures customers
can understand the true energy costs associated with operation. (Howe,
No. 6 at p. 10)
AHRI stated that average use cycles vary greatly per applications
based on water and ambient temperatures, and that the test procedure
was developed to average outside variable conditions into a snapshot of
unit performance under normal operating conditions. AHRI commented that
test results provide comparable representation of energy consumption
among products. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 5) AHRI and Hoshizaki commented that
the ambient air temperature and water supply temperature specified in
AHRI Standard 810 were selected by manufacturers as a good compromise
for a replicable, representative test. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 6; Hoshizaki,
No. 4 at p. 2)
DOE acknowledges that ACIMs may be installed and operated in a
range of ambient conditions. However, DOE is proposing to maintain the
single set of rating conditions currently required in the DOE test
procedure. Specifically, DOE is proposing to maintain the reference to
AHRI Standard 810, through AHRI Standard 810-2016, for rating
conditions because those were selected as representative, repeatable
rating conditions of this equipment. As noted, EPCA requires that if
AHRI Standard 810 is amended, DOE must

[[Page 72339]]

amend the test procedures for ACIM as necessary to be consistent with
the amended AHRI test standard, unless DOE determines, by rule,
published in the Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing
evidence, that to do so would not meet the requirements for test
procedures regarding representativeness and test burden. (42 U.S.C.
6314(7)(B)) DOE does not have any contrary data or information
regarding the representativeness of the conditions specified in AHRI
Standard 810-2016.
In addition, the response of ACIM refrigeration systems to varying
ambient conditions is different than the response of refrigeration
systems in other refrigeration and HVAC equipment. Other refrigeration
or HVAC equipment is typically designed to maintain conditions within a
space. Accordingly, as ambient conditions change, the refrigeration
systems typically cycle (or in the case of variable-speed compressors,
adjust speed) to match the varying heat loads. In the case of ACIMs,
the refrigeration system continuously operates while actively making
ice, as heat is constantly removed from the water throughout the
freezing process. As a result, introducing a second lower-temperature
test condition would not result in part-load operation for ACIMs and
would not additionally differentiate between units based on a part-load
response, as is the case for other refrigeration or HVAC equipment.
Thus, DOE has tentatively determined that the existing test condition
provides representative, repeatable rating conditions for this
equipment, and DOE expects that the burden of introducing a second test
condition (which would approximately double test duration) would not be
justified.
Issue 19: DOE requests comment on its proposal to maintain the
existing ambient temperature and water supply temperature requirements.
If modifications should be considered to improve test
representativeness or decrease test burden, DOE requests supporting
data and information.
e. Water Pressure
As discussed in section III.C and shown in Table III.2, ASHRAE
Standard 29-2015 now includes water pressure measurement requirements,
whereas ASHRAE Standard 29-2009 did not address water pressure. Section
6.3 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 directs that the pressure of the supply
water be measured within 8 inches of the ACIM and that the pressure
remains within the specified range (AHRI Standard 810-2007 and 2016
both specify 30 +/-3 psig water supply) during the period of time that
water is flowing into the ACIM inlet(s).
Certain ACIMs do not continuously draw water into the unit during
the entire test. The portions of the test when the water inlet valve
opens may result in a short, transient state when the water pressure
falls outside of the allowable tolerance. Eliminating such transient
periods would likely require certain laboratories to re-configure their
water supply setups. Because of this burden and the relatively low
impact of these transient periods on water consumed (i.e., the
transient periods are typically very short relative to the overall
duration of water flow), DOE is proposing to allow for water pressure
to be outside of the specified tolerance for a short period of time
when water begins flowing into the unit.
Section 2.4 of the DOE test procedure for consumer dishwashers
addresses this same issue by requiring that the specified water
pressure be achieved within 2 seconds of opening the water supply
valve. 10 CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix C1. The sampling rate in Section
5.7 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 requires a maximum interval between data
samples for water pressure of no more than 5 seconds. Therefore, DOE
proposes to clarify that water pressure when water is flowing into the
ice maker must be within the allowable range within 5 seconds of
opening the water supply valve. DOE does not expect that this proposal
would impact tested performance under the current DOE test procedure as
it provides additional specificity regarding the existing water
pressure requirements.
Issue 20: DOE requests comment on its proposal to require that
water pressure when water is flowing into the ice maker be within the
allowable range within 5 seconds of opening the water supply valve.
4. Test Setup and Equipment Configurations
Since publication of the January 2012 final rule, DOE has issued
two final guidance documents addressing certain aspects of the ACIM
test procedure: Prohibiting the use of temporary baffles and requiring
use of a fixed purge water setting. As discussed in the following
paragraphs, DOE has reviewed the guidance documents to determine
whether they should be maintained and expressly included in the test
procedure. In addition, in reviewing the existing DOE ACIM test
procedure, DOE has initially determined that the representativeness and
repeatability of the test procedure could be further improved through
additional specifications for test installation, ambient temperature
measurement, and testing ACIMs with dispensers.
a. Temporary Baffles
After publication of the January 2012 final rule, DOE issued a
guidance document on September 24, 2013, regarding the use of temporary
baffles during testing.\10\ As described in the guidance, a baffle is a
partition, usually made of a flat material such as cardboard, plastic,
or sheet metal, that reduces or prevents recirculation of warm air from
an ice maker's air outlet to its air inlet, or, for remote condensers,
from the condenser's air outlet to its inlet. Temporary baffles refer
to those installed only temporarily during testing and are not part of
the ACIM model as distributed in commerce or installed in the field.
During testing, the use of temporary baffles can block recirculation of
warm condenser discharge air to the air inlet. This would reduce the
average temperature of the air entering the inlet, which would result
in lower energy use that would not be representative of the energy use
of the unit as operated by the end user.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ See <a href="http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/acim_baffles_faq_2013-9-24final.pdf">www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/acim_baffles_faq_2013-9-24final.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the guidance document, DOE expressly stated that installing such
temporary baffles is inconsistent with the ACIM test procedure, which
states that the unit must be ``set up for testing according to the
manufacturer's written instruction provided with the unit'' and that
``no adjustments of any kind shall be made to the test unit prior to or
during the test that would affect the ice capacity, energy usage, or
water usage of the test sample.'' \11\ Therefore, DOE's final guidance
stated that the use of baffles to prevent recirculation of air between
the air outlet and inlet of the ice maker during testing is not
consistent with the DOE test procedure for automatic commercial ice
makers, unless the baffle is (a) a part of the ice maker or (b) shipped
with the ice maker to be installed according to the manufacturer's
installation instructions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ Section 4.1.4, ``Test Set Up,'' of AHRI Standard 810-2007
and AHRI Standard 810-2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on the use of
temporary baffles in testing ACIMs and whether DOE should amend the
test procedure to permit their use in testing. 84 FR 9979, 9982-9983.
The Joint Commenters commented that the test procedure needs to
address testing with temporary baffles, as this guidance would help
clarify the intent of the test procedure. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at
p. 1) Hoshizaki,

[[Page 72340]]

AHRI, and Howe commented that temporary baffles may not be used for
testing, unless the baffle is found in product marketing, is shipped
with the ice maker, and is to be installed according to the
manufacturers' installation instructions. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 1;
AHRI, No. 5 at p. 3; Howe, No. 6 at p. 4) Brema commented that all
parts that can be removed by the final user should be removed during
the energy consumption test. (Brema, No. 3 at p. 4)
Based on the final guidance document and consistent with feedback
received in response to the March 2019 RFI, DOE proposes to define the
term ``baffle'' consistent with the description in the guidance
document and to expressly prohibit the use of baffles when testing of
ACIMs unless the baffle is (a) a part of the ice maker or (b) shipped
with the ice maker to be installed according to the manufacturer's
installation instructions. DOE is not proposing that all parts that can
be removed by the final user shall be removed for testing. The proposed
approach based on manufacturer installation instruction is likely how
an ice maker would be installed during use and is most representative
of the energy use of ACIMs operated in the field. This proposal does
not add any burden or impact measured performance compared to the
existing test procedure, as it is consistent with how the test
procedure currently must be performed, and based on commenters'
feedback, how it is currently being conducted.
Issue 21: DOE requests comment on its proposal to expressly provide
that a baffle must not be used when testing ACIMs unless the baffle is
(a) a part of the ice maker or (b) shipped with the ice maker to be
installed according to the manufacturer's installation instructions.
The guidance document issued by DOE on September 24, 2013, also
acknowledged that warm air discharged from an ice maker's outlet can
affect the ambient air temperature measurement such that it fluctuates
outside the maximum allowed <plus-minus>1 [deg]F or <plus-minus>2
[deg]F range, and that baffles can prevent such fluctuation. Because
temporary baffles are not permitted for use during testing, DOE stated
in the guidance document that if the ambient air temperature
fluctuations cannot be maintained within the required tolerances,
temperature measuring devices may be shielded so that the indicated
temperature will not be affected by the intermittent passing of warm
discharge air at the measurement location. DOE also stated that the
shields must not block recirculation of the warm discharge air into the
condenser or ice maker inlet.
Based on the final guidance document, DOE proposes to specify in
the test procedure that if the ambient air temperature fluctuations
(and relative humidity as discussed in section III.D.3.a) cannot be
maintained within the required tolerances, temperature measuring
devices (and relative humidity measuring devices) may be shielded to
limit the impact of intermittent passing of warm discharge air at the
measurement locations. DOE further proposes that if shields are used,
they must not block recirculation of the warm discharge air into the
condenser or ice maker inlet. DOE does not expect this proposal to
impact measured ACIM performance compared to the existing test
procedure, as it is consistent with the existing test approach.
Issue 22: DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify that
temperature measuring devices may be shielded to limit the impact of
intermittent warm discharge air at the measurement locations and that
if shields are used, they must not block recirculation of the warm
discharge air into the condenser or ice maker air inlet.
Issue 23: DOE requests comment on whether any ACIM models discharge
air such that the temperature and relative humidity measuring devices
would be unable to maintain the required ambient air temperature or
relative humidity tolerances even with the measuring devices shielded.
If so, DOE requests comment on whether alternate ambient air
temperature and relative humidity measurement locations would be
necessary (e.g., the ambient temperature measurement locations for
water-cooled ice makers, if those locations are not affected by
condenser discharge air) and if the ambient air temperature and
relative humidity measured at the alternate locations should be within
the same tolerances as would otherwise be required.
b. Purge Settings
Purge water refers to water that is introduced into the ice maker
during an ice-making cycle to flush dissolved solids out of the ice
maker and prevent scale buildup on the ice maker's wetted surfaces. Ice
makers generally allow for setting the purge water controls to provide
different amounts of purge water or different frequencies of purge
cycles. Different amounts of purge water may be appropriate for
different levels of water hardness or contaminants in the ACIM water
supply. Most ice makers have manually set purge settings that provide a
fixed amount of purge water, but some ice makers include an automatic
purge water control setting that automatically adjusts the purge water
quantity based on the supply water hardness.
Because purge water is cooled by the ice maker, allowing a
different purge water quantity will result in a different measured
energy use. To ensure representative and consistent test results for
ice makers with automatic purge water controls, on September 25, 2013,
DOE issued final guidance stating that ice makers with automatic purge
water control should be tested using a fixed purge water setting that
is described in the written instructions shipped with the unit as being
appropriate for water of normal, typical, or average hardness.\12\ DOE
further stated that the automatic purge setting should not be used for
testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ See <a href="http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/acim_purge_faq_2013-9-25final.pdf">www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/acim_purge_faq_2013-9-25final.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on what purge settings
should be considered for testing for ACIMs with multiple or automatic
purge settings and whether any ACIMs exist with automatic purge
settings but without a fixed purge setting appropriate for ``normal''
water hardness and, if such a unit exists, how it should be tested. 84
FR 9979, 9983.
The Joint Commenters commented that the test procedure would be
more representative of the energy use of ACIM with automatic purge
water control settings if these units were tested in such a way that
allowed the controls to adjust automatically as they would in the
field, stating that automatic purge water control settings may save
energy by reducing purge water quantity when the water supply hardness
is lower. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at p. 2)
Howe stated that the test procedure should specify the purge
setting associated with the highest energy use, as purge energy use is
significant and will impact the energy consumption of an ACIM over its
average use cycle. Howe also explained that it is not aware of any
automatically sensing purge or flush setting devices. (Howe, No. 6 at
p. 5-6)
AHRI commented that purge cycles and their frequency can affect the
sensible heat transfer during the test and therefore influence the
energy use. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 3)
Hoshizaki commented that the purge cycle's energy use over a year
is negligible compared to the energy used to produce ice. (Hoshizaki,
No. 4 at p. 1) Hoshizaki and AHRI commented that ideal purge settings
vary based on the

[[Page 72341]]

water quality of the area, and purge settings are generally set by
trained service technicians during installation. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at
p. 1; AHRI, No. 5 at p. 4) Hoshizaki commented that any changes to
purge settings for testing should be addressed through ASHRAE 29.
(Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 1)
Consistent with DOE's existing guidance, DOE proposes that ice
makers with automatic purge water control must be tested using a fixed
purge water setting that is described in the manufacturer's written
instructions shipped with the unit as being appropriate for water of
normal, typical, or average hardness. Such a control setting is likely
to reflect the most typical ACIM installation and operation. Any other
automatic purge controls (i.e., those without any user-controllable
settings) would operate as they would during normal use. Additionally,
while ACIMs may be installed and set up by service technicians based on
the installation location, such setup is not appropriate for testing
because it may introduce variability in test settings based on the test
facility location. Consistent with DOE's existing guidance, DOE is also
proposing that purge water settings described in the instructions as
suitable for use only with water that has higher or lower than normal
hardness (such as distilled water or reverse osmosis water) must not be
used for testing.
This proposal does not conflict with any of the setup or
installation requirements in AHRI 810-2016. Additionally, this proposal
would not add burden to manufacturers or impact ACIM performance as
measured under the existing test procedure, as it would codify the
final guidance document issued on September 25, 2013, specifying use of
a fixed purge setting.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE also explained that batch ice makers
might initiate a flush or purge cycle every 12 hours, and continuous
ice makers might pause the ice making operation periodically to
accomplish the additional purge. 84 FR 9979, 9983. Testing according to
the current test procedure might not include such a purge cycle, and
thus the resulting tested energy use might not appropriately represent
what an end user would experience in the field. Id. DOE requested
comment on the presence and frequency of any ``additional'' or
``increased-water'' purge cycles and their impact on energy and water
use. Id.
The Joint Commenters commented that because purge water is cooled
by the ice maker, it contributes to energy use during a representative
average use cycle. In addition, the Joint Commenters noted that the
previous energy conservation standards rulemaking considered reduced
potable water flow as a technology option for reducing energy use. The
Joint Commenters further stated that DOE's analysis showed that some or
all of the purge water drained from batch ice makers leaves the
equipment near 32 [deg]F, which represents lost refrigeration that
could potentially have been used to produce more ice. (Joint
Commenters, No. 2 at p. 1) The Joint Commenters stated that DOE should
investigate how to capture the impact of any ``additional'' or
``increased-water'' purge cycles, including additional purges outside
of regular cycling or continuous operation, which may not be captured
by the current test procedure. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at p. 2)
AHRI commented that introducing specifications to require a purge
cycle during the test would introduce additional burden to
manufacturers, and that all ACIM units should be tested at the factory
default settings. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 4)
Howe commented that the current ACIM test procedure does not allow
for the energy use from a flush cycle to be determined, and that the
current test procedure results are not representative of the total
energy used by the ice maker when flush cycles are considered. Howe
stated that some manufacturers allow settings that flush all contents
of the evaporator, in which case all of the water/ice product inside of
the evaporator is melted by the incoming water to ensure all the
dissolved solids in the evaporator are flushed from the system. Howe
commented that the energy used by the ice maker to make the chilled
water/ice inside of the evaporator at the beginning of the cycle is
wasted and not turned into useable ice product for the end user. Howe
stated that following the flush, the ACIM will then turn on and need to
pull down the evaporator to return to the steady state operating
condition. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 6) Howe also suggests that the internal
volume of ACIMs that use flush cycles be used to estimate the amount of
ice product that is wasted during a flush cycle to determine an energy
penalty associated with the flush cycle. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 6)
Brema commented that the purge cycle must be excluded from the
average functionality time and not be considered for the energy
consumption calculation. (Brema, No. 3 at p. 4)
DOE conducted testing to investigate the energy and water
consumption associated with flush or purge cycles. Table III.6
summarizes how a purge cycle contributes to the energy and water
consumption of a continuous ACIM.

Table III.6--Summary of Energy & Water Consumption of a Continuous ACIM With Purge Cycle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy
Mode Average power consumption Average water
draw (W) (kWh) usage (lbs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ice Production.................................................. 936 11.23 * 275
Purge (every 12 hours by default)............................... 35 0.01 2.0
Recovery after Purge............................................ 1,062 0.08 N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This number represents the harvest weight during the associated operating period. The total amount of water
used may be higher. N/A: The water used during the recovery after purge does not differ from normal ice
production.

As shown in Table III.6, the purge cycle, including the recovery
after purge, consumed 0.09 kWh, representing less than 1 percent of the
total energy consumed over a period of normal operation (i.e., ice
production, automatic purge cycle, and purge recovery). Additionally,
the ACIM consumed 2 gallons of water during the purge cycle,
representing less than 1 percent of the total consumed over the period
of normal operation.
In comparison, DOE testing of a batch ACIM showed that the purge
occurred once every 5 hours under the default setting and coincided
with the start of a harvest, resulting in no separate purge cycle. DOE
observed an increased batch cycle time for the purge cycle and a
corresponding increase in ice collected. DOE also observed that power
draw over the purge cycle was consistent with a typical non-purge
cycle. As a result, the harvest rate and energy use rate

[[Page 72342]]

observed for a purge cycle were similar to those measured over stable
non-purge cycles.
DOE also observed that testing to account for the energy and water
consumption of purge cycles would require a significant increase in
total test time. Table III.7 presents DOE's estimates of the test
durations under the existing test approach and under an approach that
would account for purge operation.

Table III.7--Summary of Estimated Test Durations With and Without Including Purge Cycles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duration (hours)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Test unit Existing ice Existing test Ice production
production test total (without test (with Test total (with
(without purge) purge) purge) purge)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continuous.............................. 2 8 12.5 18.5
Batch................................... 2 8 5.5 11.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As discussed further in section III.F.1.a, DOE estimates a typical
ACIM test duration to be 8 hours, including set up, pull-down, and test
operation. The period of active ice production measured depends on how
quickly the unit achieves stability, but the existing test approach
requires measuring at least 5 or 6 ice collection periods (for batch
and continuous ACIM, respectively) for confirming stability and
conducting the test. DOE observed that the durations of the required
ice collection periods were approximately 2 hours for both the
continuous and batch ACIM in the test sample. Accounting for purge
cycle operation would require extending the test period to capture both
stable ice production and normal purge operation. This would require an
estimated increase in test duration of 10.5 hours (more than double)
for the continuous test unit and 3.5 hours (approximately 44 percent)
for the batch test unit.
The energy and water consumption during the flush or purge cycles
are very small relative to the energy and water consumed during normal
ice production and the additional test burden associated with measuring
purge events would be a significant increase in test burden. Therefore,
DOE is not proposing to address flush or purge cycles in its test
procedure.
Issue 24: DOE requests comment on its proposal to require ACIMs
with automatic purge water control to be tested using a fixed purge
water setting that is described in the manufacturer's written
instructions shipped with the unit as being appropriate for water of
normal, typical, or average hardness. DOE also requests comment on its
initial determination to not account for energy or water used during
intermittent flush or purge cycles. DOE continues to request data
regarding the energy and water use impacts of purge cycles.
c. Clearances
As discussed in section III.C and shown in Table III.2, the
clearance requirements around a unit under test changed between ASHRAE
Standard 29-2009 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2015. The current DOE test
procedure, through reference to section 6.4 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2009,
requires a clearance of 18 inches on all four sides of the test unit,
while section 6.5 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 requires a minimum
clearance of 3 feet to adjacent test chamber walls, or the minimum
clearance specified by the manufacturer, whichever is greater.
In response to the March 2019 RFI, Howe commented that it is
reasonable for customers to expect units to perform at their ratings
when using the minimum clearances as described in the manufacturer
literature. Howe recommended that DOE require a clearance of 3 feet, or
the minimum clearance allowed by the manufacturer, whichever is less,
to better represent an average use cycle. Howe also commented that this
clearance should include all machine clearances, not just walls within
the test chamber, and that a minimum clearance enclosure be built for
testing ACIMs based on the harshest manufacturer-recommended operating
installation, without blocking an intake air path to the ice maker.
Howe also commented that this setup would not be a large test burden as
many manufacturers test units of similar size, and the enclosures could
be used over multiple tests. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 4)
DOE conducted testing to assess how the different clearance
requirements could affect the measured energy consumption and harvest
rate of ACIMs. DOE investigated the performance of ACIMs under four
clearance setups: (1) The clearance required by ASHRAE Standard 29-
2015, (2) the clearance required by the current DOE test procedure
(through reference to ASHRAE Standard 29-2009), (3) all minimum
clearances as recommend by the manufacturer, and (4) the rear minimum
clearance as recommend by the manufacturer with all other clearances
per ASHRAE Standard 29-2015. Table III.8 summarizes how four test units
performed under the four clearance setups.

Table III.8--Summary of Clearance Impact on ACIM Performance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in Change in energy
Harvest rate harvest rate Energy consumption
Test unit Clearance setup (lbs of ice/ (from ASHRAE consumption (kWh/ (from ASHRAE
24hrs) standard 29- 100 lbs of ice) standard 29-
2015) 2015)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................... ASHRAE Standard 573 N/A 4.93 N/A
29-2015.
Current DOE Test 575 0% 4.97 1%
Procedure.
Minimum 548 -4% 5.25 6%
Clearances.
Minimum Rear 576 1% 4.94 0%
Clearance.
2................... ASHRAE Standard 814 N/A 4.46 N/A
29-2015.
Current DOE Test 815 0% 4.48 0%
Procedure.
Minimum 794 -2% 4.59 3%
Clearances.

[[Page 72343]]

Minimum Rear 820 1% -4.41 1%
Clearance.
3................... ASHRAE Standard 1,164 N/A 4.41 N/A
29-2015.
Current DOE Test 1,164 0% 4.46 1%
Procedure.
Minimum 1,043 -10% 5.14 17%
Clearances.
Minimum Rear 1,149 -1% 4.44 1%
Clearance.
4................... ASHRAE Standard 1,197 N/A 5.40 N/A
29-2015.
Current DOE Test 1,195 0% 5.43 1%
Procedure.
Minimum 1,105 -8% 6.04 12%
Clearances.
Minimum Rear 1,197 0% 5.39 0%
Clearance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The tests indicate that the different clearance requirements,
except for the installation with all minimum clearances, have little to
no impact on the measured performance of ACIMs. The impact observed
from the minimum clearance test is likely due to the exhaust air being
directed through the test enclosure (i.e., the minimum clearances on
the sides, back, and top of the ACIM resulted in an enclosure guiding
condenser exhaust air) back to the front air inlet on the ACIM, which
results in the ACIM drawing in warmer air than under the three other
setup configurations. As described in section III.D.4.a, testing with a
temporary baffle to prevent such air flow is not appropriate, so the
condenser exhaust re-circulated during this investigative testing.
Based on these test results, an installation configuration that
provides only the minimum manufacturer test clearances for all sides
represents a worst-case installation for ACIM performance. While
manufacturers might provide minimum clearances for all sides of a unit,
the expectation may be that units are installed such that one or more
of the sides has clearance exceeding the manufacturer minimum.
Similarly, a minimum clearance of 3 feet to adjacent test chamber
walls or a clearance of 18 inches on all four sides (as required by
ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 and the current DOE test procedure,
respectively) may also not be a typical ACIM installation. Because
ACIMs are typically installed in commercial food service applications
with space constraints, such as commercial kitchens, end users likely
install their ACIMs against at least a rear wall using the manufacturer
minimum clearance to maximize available working space. Based on the
test data in Table III.7, testing according to the manufacturer-
specified minimum rear clearance has little to no measured impact on
ACIM performance for the four test units. However, because ACIMs may
exhaust condenser air from the rear of the unit, an inappropriate
manufacturer minimum rear clearance (or lack of manufacturer
instructions regarding rear clearance) could adversely affect ACIM
performance while being representative of typical use, and should be
captured in the tested performance.
Therefore, DOE proposes that ACIMs be tested according to the
manufacturer's specified minimum rear clearance requirements, or 3 feet
from the rear of the ACIM, whichever is less. DOE is proposing testing
be conducted with a minimum clearance of 3 feet or the minimum
clearance specified by the manufacturer, whichever is greater, on all
other sides of the ACIM and all sides of the remote condenser, if
applicable. This clearance for all sides other than the rear of the
ACIM is generally consistent with the requirement in ASHRAE Standard
29-2015. As discussed, and shown in the DOE test data, the impact of
this proposed change on measured energy use for currently certified
ACIMs would likely be de minimis. DOE expects manufacturer installation
instructions would typically provide for clearances that would ensure
sufficient air flow to avoid any adverse impacts on ACIM performance
under the proposed test setup.
DOE is not proposing specific requirements for the wall used to
maintain the rear clearance when conducting the test. Test laboratories
would be able to satisfy the clearance requirements in any way they
choose, as long as the test installation meets the proposed
requirements.
Issue 25: DOE requests comment on its proposal to require that
ACIMs be tested according to the manufacturer's specified minimum rear
clearance requirements, or 3 feet from the rear of the ACIM, whichever
is less. All other sides of the ACIM and all sides of the remote
condenser, if applicable, shall be tested with a minimum clearance of 3
feet or the minimum clearance specified by the manufacturer, whichever
is greater. DOE also requests comment on whether this proposal would
affect measured energy use and harvest rate compared to the existing
DOE test procedure.
d. Ambient Temperature Measurement
Air temperature fluctuations from the test chamber or the ACIM's
condenser exhaust air can potentially affect an ACIM's measured energy
consumption and harvest rate.
The current ACIM test procedure, which is based on AHRI Standard
810-2007 and ASHRAE Standard 29-2009, does not specify whether a
weighted or unweighted sensor is to be used to measure ambient
temperature. A weighted sensor measures the temperature of a high
conductivity (isothermal) mass to which it is connected. The mass slows
equilibration of the measured temperature with the surrounding air,
thus damping out air temperature fluctuations. This may result in a
weighted sensor indicating that the fluctuations are within the
required temperature tolerances, whereas an unweighted sensor could
indicate temperature extremes exceeding the required temperature
tolerances. This difference in function of the sensors impacts the
application of the required temperature tolerances, i.e., temperature
fluctuations that fall outside the required tolerances may not be
detected when using a weighted sensor, but would be detected when using
an unweighted sensor.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment about whether
manufacturers use weighted or unweighted temperature measurement
instruments to measure ambient temperatures during ice maker testing.
DOE also sought comment and data on the benefits and burdens of using
unweighted

[[Page 72344]]

temperature measurement instruments compared to weighted temperature
measurement instruments. 84 FR 9979, 9985.
Hoshizaki commented that it currently uses unweighted temperature
measurement instruments to record ambient temperature readings during
testing. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2) AHRI stated that these unweighted
instruments are quick to react to change but can exhibit some
fluctuation during readings. AHRI also noted that unweighted
instrumentation sufficiently meets the tolerances and requirements set
forth in the test procedures and does not increase testing time or
instrumentation cost as weighted temperature sensors would. (AHRI, No.
5 at p. 7) Howe recommended that DOE make the type of temperature
instrument explicit for each measurement location on the product,
noting that an unweighted versus weighted temperature instrument can
create uncertainty that will impact the average use cycle energy use.
Howe also commented that room temperature could be measured by a
weighted temperature device, while the condenser inlet air be measured
by an unweighted temperature device, due to the nature of the inlet air
directly impacting the performance of the refrigeration system. (Howe,
No. 6 at p. 12-13)
DOE conducted testing to evaluate the ability to meet the specified
tolerances of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 using both weighted and
unweighted temperature sensors. The temperature fluctuations recorded
by weighted temperature sensors may be less than those recorded with
unweighted measurement due to damping of the fluctuations by the
weighted thermal mass. As such, weighted sensors may give the false
impression that ambient temperature tolerances of <plus-minus>2 [deg]F
during the first 5 minutes of each freeze cycle, and not more than
<plus-minus>1 [deg]F thereafter, are met during testing. The
measurement of ambient temperature using unweighted sensors provides
more representative measures of actual instantaneous ambient
temperature conditions than the measurement of weighted sensors. DOE
observed in its testing that the ambient temperature was within the
tolerances specified in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 for all freeze cycles
when using either weighted or unweighted sensors.
Therefore, DOE proposes to specify that unweighted sensors shall be
used to make all ambient temperature measurements. Based on comments,
this proposal reflects current industry practice and would not add any
burden. This proposal is consistent with AHRI Standard 810-2016 because
it specifies the instrumentation for measuring ambient temperature, but
does not otherwise change the existing requirements.
Issue 26: DOE requests comment on its proposal to specify that
ambient temperature measurements shall be made using unweighted
sensors.
The current DOE guidance and proposal in this NOPR regarding the
use of temporary baffles, as discussed in section III.D.4.a, illustrate
that temporary baffles can reduce or prevent recirculation of warm air
from an ACIM's condenser exhaust air to its air inlet. This
recirculation of warm air can potentially affect an ACIM's measured
energy consumption and harvest rate, and using a temporary baffle for
testing is unrepresentative of actual ACIM use. The recirculation of
warm air may also affect the ability to maintain ambient temperature
within the range specified in AHRI Standard 810-2016 and relative
humidity within the range proposed in this NOPR. For example, if the
condenser exhaust is warm enough and directed towards the air inlet
location (and corresponding ambient temperature measurement), the
measured ambient temperature may be warmer than the representative
ambient temperature around the unit under test, even with shielding
around the temperature sensor.
To evaluate the extent of this potential impact on temperature, DOE
tested an ACIM which exhausted its warm condenser air on the side of
the ACIM adjacent to the side with the air intake. Three ambient
thermocouples were placed 1 foot from the geometric center of each side
around the ACIM in addition to the unshielded ambient thermocouple that
was placed 1 foot from the air inlet. The unshielded ambient
thermocouple that was located 1 foot from the air inlet was used to
control the test chamber conditions in accordance with AHRI Standard
810-2016 (i.e., the overall chamber temperature was reduced as
necessary to maintain the temperature one foot in front of the air
inlet as close to 90 [deg]F as possible). Table III.9 summarizes the
results of this testing.

Table III.9--Average Ambient Temperatures Measured on Each Side Around
an ACIM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opposite side of Opposite side of
Inlet ([deg]F) Exhaust ([deg]F) exhaust ([deg]F) inlet ([deg]F)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
89.9 90.2 88.5 88.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As shown in Table III.9, the air within the chamber had to be
reduced below 89 [deg]F (outside the 90 <plus-minus>1 [deg]F allowable
ambient temperature range specified in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015) to
maintain the temperature at the air inlet near the specified 90 [deg]F
condition. This data suggests that ACIM models that allow the warm
condenser exhaust air to recirculate to the air intake may require
lower overall ambient test chamber temperatures to maintain the
specified condition at the air inlet. As discussed in section
III.D.4.a, DOE's guidance regarding temporary baffles states that
temperature measuring devices may be shielded so that the indicated
temperature will not be affected by the intermittent passing of warm
discharge air at the measurement location. DOE also noted that the
shields must not block recirculation of the warm discharge air into the
condenser or ice maker inlet. The ambient temperature measurement is
meant to represent the temperature of the air around the unit under
test that is not impacted by unit operation. Because test facilities
may have difficulty effectively shielding the air inlet thermocouple
from warm discharge air without blocking the recirculation of that air
to the ACIM air inlet, DOE is proposing that the ambient temperature
may be recorded at an alternative location. DOE proposes that for ACIMs
in which warm air discharge impacts the ambient temperature as measured
in front of the air inlet (i.e., the warm condenser exhaust airflow is
directed to the ambient temperature location in front of the air
inlet), the ambient temperature may instead be measured at locations 1
foot from the cabinet, centered with respect to the sides of the
cabinet, for each side of the ACIM cabinet with no air discharge or
inlet. This proposal is an alternative intended to reduce burden
compared to the existing approach implemented in DOE's current test
procedure guidance. DOE expects that this proposal would

[[Page 72345]]

not impact measured ACIM performance compared to the existing test
approach. DOE also proposes that the relative humidity measurement, as
proposed in this NOPR, would also be made at the same alternative
locations.
Test installation according to the manufacturer's minimum rear
clearance requirements, as discussed in section III.D.4.c, may affect
the ability to measure the ambient temperature and relative humidity 1
foot from the air inlet if the air intake is through the rear side of
the ACIM and the minimum rear clearance is less than 1 foot from the
air inlet. Additionally, the alternate measurement location, as
proposed earlier in this section, would not be feasible for the rear
side of a model with no air discharge or inlet on that side and with a
minimum rear clearance of less than 1 foot.
Accordingly, DOE proposes that if a measurement location 1 foot
from the rear of an ACIM is not feasible for testing that would
otherwise require a measurement at that location, the ambient
temperature and relative humidity shall instead be measured 1 foot from
the cabinet, centered with respect to the surface(s) of the ACIM, for
any surfaces around the perimeter of the ACIM that do not include an
air discharge or air inlet. DOE similarly does not expect this proposal
to impact current ACIM measurements as it provides an alternative
measurement location for the existing ambient temperature and relative
humidity requirements.
Issue 27: DOE requests comment on its proposal to allow for an
alternate ambient temperature (and relative humidity) measurement
location to avoid complications associated with shielding the
measurement in front of the air inlet, as currently required. DOE also
requests comment on the proposal for measuring ambient temperature and
relative humidity for ACIMs for which the proposed rear clearance would
preclude temperature measurements at the rear of the unit under test.
e. Ice Cube Settings
DOE is aware that some ice makers have the capability to make
various sizes of cubes. The size of the cube can typically be selected
on the control panel of the ice maker, for example. Section 5.2 of AHRI
Standard 810-2016 states that for machines with adjustable ice cube
settings, standard ratings are determined for the largest and the
smallest cube settings, and that ratings for intermediate cube settings
may be published as application ratings. This is consistent with the
current DOE requirement as incorporated by reference in AHRI Standard
810-2007.
In response to the March 2019 RFI, DOE received a comment from
Brema suggesting that, if parts of an ACIM can be adjusted by the final
user (e.g., electronic settings), the ACIM must be tested with the
worst possible configuration. (Brema, No. 3 at p. 4)
DOE is not proposing any change to the existing industry
requirement to determine ratings under the largest and smallest cube
settings for ACIMs with adjustable ice cube settings. EPCA requires the
DOE test procedure to be reasonably designed to produce test results
which reflect energy use during a representative average use cycle. The
current requirement to test using the largest and smallest cube setting
is based on the industry standard, which was developed based on
industry's experience with this equipment. There is no information to
support that testing at the ``worst possible configuration'' would be
representative of an average use cycle. Additionally, the approach
suggested by Brema would require manufacturers to test every possible
size setting to determine which has the highest energy use rate. As
such, DOE is not proposing to change the current requirement to test at
both the smallest and largest cube setting, which is the same as the
requirement in AHRI Standard 810-2016.
Issue 28: DOE requests comment on maintaining the current
requirement to test at the largest and smallest ice cube size settings,
consistent with AHRI Standard 810-2016. DOE also requests information
on the ice cube size setting typically used by customers with ACIMs
with multiple size settings (largest, smallest, default, etc.).
f. Ice Makers With Dispensers
DOE is aware of certain self-contained ACIMs that dispense ice to a
user through an automatic dispenser when prompted by the user. Testing
according to the current DOE test procedure or the updated industry
standards as proposed in this NOPR may be difficult or impossible for
certain ACIM configurations with automatic dispensers.
Section 6.6 in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 specifies that an ACIM must
have its bin one-half full of ice when collecting capacity
measurements. DOE is aware of self-contained ACIMs with dispensers that
contain internal storage bins that are not accessible during normal
operation (i.e., users access the ice only through use of the
dispenser). Because the internal bins are not accessible during normal
operation, it can be difficult or impossible to establish a storage bin
one-half full of ice for testing. Additionally, isolating the ice
produced during testing from the ice initially placed in a one-half
full storage bin may be difficult or impossible, depending on the
dispenser and internal storage bin configuration.
Section 6.10 of ASHRAE Standard 29-2015 requires that the ACIM be
completely assembled with all panels, doors, and lids in their normally
closed positions during the test. Additionally, Section 4.1.4 of AHRI
Standard 810-2016 requires that the test unit shall be configured for
testing per the manufacturer's written instructions provided with the
unit. It also requires that no adjustments of any kind shall be made to
the test unit prior to or during the test that would affect the ice
capacity, energy usage, or water usage of the test sample. Many self-
contained ACIMs with dispensers would require removing case panels or
the top lid to access the internal ice bin for ice collection or
establishing initial test setup. In typical operation, users would
access the ice only through the dispenser mechanism.
Through a letter dated January 28, 2020, Hoshizaki America, Inc.
(``Hoshizaki'') petitioned for a waiver and interim waiver from the DOE
ACIM test procedure at 10 CFR 431.134 for ice/water dispenser ACIM
basic models to address the test issues previously described in this
section (case number 2020-001 \13\). On July 23, 2020, DOE granted
Hoshizaki an interim waiver to test the identified ACIM basic models
with a modified test procedure. 85 FR 44529. After providing
opportunity for public comment on the interim waiver and reviewing the
one comment received, DOE granted Hoshizaki a waiver through a final
decision and order published on October 28, 2020, requiring that the
subject basic models be tested according to the modified alternate test
procedure as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ The petition and related documents are available at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> in docket EERE-2020-BT-WAV-0005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prior to the start of the test, remove the front panel of the unit
under test and insert a bracket to hold the shutter (which allows for
the dispensing of ice during the test) completely open for the duration
of the test. After inserting the bracket, return the front panel to its
original position on the unit under test. Conduct the test procedure as
specified in 10 CFR 431.134 except that the internal ice bin for the
unit under test shall be empty at the start of the test and intercepted
ice samples shall be obtained from a container in an external ice bin
that is filled one-half full with

[[Page 72346]]

ice and is connected to the outlet of the ice dispenser through the
minimum length of conduit that can be used. 85 FR 68315.
This waiver granted to Hoshizaki includes instructions for testing
the specific basic models addressed in that waiver process. However,
other ACIM models with dispensers would likely require similar testing
instructions. Moreover, after the granting of any waiver, DOE must
publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to
amend its regulations to eliminate any need for the continuation of
such waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(l). Therefore, DOE proposes to add general
test instructions to the DOE test procedure at 10 CFR 431.134(b)(6) to
allow for testing such models. DOE is proposing that ACIMs with a
dispenser be tested with continuous production and dispensing of ice
throughout the stabilization and test periods. If an ACIM with a
dispenser is not able to allow for the continuous production and
dispensing of ice because of certain mechanisms within the ACIM that
prohibit this function, those mechanisms must be overridden to the
minimum extent that allows for the continuous production and dispensing
of ice. For example, this would allow for the temporary removal of
panels or overriding of certain controls, if necessary. The capacity
samples would be collected in an external bin one-half full with ice
and connected to the outlet of the ice dispenser through the minimal
length of conduit that can be used for the required time period as
defined in ASHRAE Standard 29-2015. Because of the continuous
production and dispensing of ice, these ACIMs would be required to have
an empty internal storage bin at the beginning of testing. This would
ensure that the collection periods capture only the quantity of ice
produced during that period (i.e., this would avoid any ice being
collected that was produced prior to the collection period). This
proposed approach would address issues with testing ACIM models with
automatic dispensers, while allowing a representative measure of how
ACIMs with dispensers are typically used. This approach would also
minimize test burden by avoiding the need to significantly alter the
configurations of these ACIM models for testing (e.g., allowing for
access to any internal storage bins during performance testing).
Issue 29: DOE requests comment on its proposal to collect capacity
samples for ACIMs with dispensers through the continuous production and
dispensing of ice throughout testing, using an empty internal storage
bin at the beginning of the test period and collecting the ice sample
through the dispenser in an external bin one-half full of ice. DOE also
requests comment on its proposal to allow for certain mechanisms within
the ACIM that would prohibit the continuous production and dispensing
of ice throughout testing to be overridden to the minimum extent that
allows for the continuous production and dispensing of ice. DOE seeks
information on how manufacturers of these ACIMs currently test and rate
this equipment under the existing DOE test procedure, whether the
proposal would impact the energy use as currently measured, and on the
burden associated with the proposed approach or any alternative test
approaches.
g. Remote ACIMs
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on whether the current
test procedure could be improved to measure energy use more accurately
during a representative average use cycle for remote condensing ice
makers with dedicated condensing units. 84 FR 9979, 9983-9984. More
specifically, DOE requested feedback on whether default refrigerant
charging and line set specifications would be necessary absent
manufacturer recommendations. Id. DOE also sought information on
whether any additional test instructions would be needed for remote
condensing ice makers. Id.
AHRI noted that many units are meant to be installed with specific
condensing equipment, and DOE should follow the manufacturer
installation and operation instructions to appropriately set up and
test the unit. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 5)
The Joint Commenters commented in support of providing default
refrigerant charging and line set specifications, claiming it would
provide consistency across testing laboratories and improve test
repeatability and reproducibility. The Joint Commenters added that,
before doing so, DOE should verify that the minimum requirement of 25
feet of interconnection tubing specified in AHRI 810 is representative
of typical field installations. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at p. 2-3)
Brema commented that the test must be performed according to
technical specification and information listed on installation/
instruction manufacturer manual. (Brema, No. 3 at p. 5)
Hoshizaki stated that ASHRAE 29 and AHRI 810 specify a minimum 25-
foot line set or manufacturer's recommended set and that any additions
to the current test method would need to be addressed in the ASHRAE 29
standard committee to verify that it would not be costly and
burdensome. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2)
Howe requested that DOE mandate refrigerant line size and charge
instructions be included by the manufacturer with all remote condensing
applications because there are many differences between manufacturers'
systems, and a general guideline will not suffice. Howe recommended
that the line size length for remote installations continue to be
specified in the standard and account for typical remote condensing
application in the field. (Howe, No. 6 at p. 8)
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE also requested comment on the
appropriate test approach for remote ACIMs intended to be installed
without a dedicated condensing unit (i.e., ACIMs intended for use with
refrigerant supplied by a remote compressor rack). 84 FR 9979, 9983-
9984. DOE sought feedback on what types of these units are available on
the market (i.e., batch vs. continuous), whether an enthalpy test
approach similar to that used for commercial refrigeration equipment
would be appropriate for testing these ice makers, and if so, any
additional instructions that would be needed for such testing. Id.
The Joint Commenters and Howe commented that DOE should apply a
similar approach to remote condensing ice makers designed to be
connected to compressor racks as for other types of remote condensing
refrigeration equipment, which relies on a refrigerant enthalpy
calculation and assumed compressor efficiencies to estimate the energy
consumption of the compressor rack. (Joint Commenters, No. 2 at p. 3;
Howe, No. 6 at p. 8-9)
AHRI stated that remote condensing ice makers that connect to
condensing racks are currently outside the scope of AHRI 810 and ASHRAE
29. (AHRI, No. 5 at p. 5) Hoshizaki and AHRI commented that the market
for these remote ACIM with non-dedicated condensing units is very
small, and those that do exist are typically continuous. Hoshizaki and
AHRI stated that testing units without dedicated compressors or
condensers is more difficult due to the wide variety of installation
variables. (Hoshizaki, No. 4 at p. 2; AHRI, No. 5 at p. 5)
DOE is not proposing amendments to the existing test procedures for
testing remote condensing ACIMs. Based on a review of manufacturer
installation instructions for ACIMs with dedicated remote condensing
units, manufacturers typically recommend line sets and/or limitations
to installation locations.

[[Page 72347]]

DOE has preliminarily determined that testing according to the
manufacturer recommendations, as is currently required, rather than one
specified remote setup, would represent typical use in the field and
would produce consistent test results.
Many ACIMs that could be installed with refrigerant supplied by a
compressor rack can also be tested with an appropriately sized
dedicated condensing unit according to the existing test procedure. For
ACIMs installed with a compressor rack, DOE lacks information on
typical installation locations, operation, and market availability. As
noted in the AHRI and Hoshizaki comments, the market for compressor
rack installations is very small. Based on these comments, the existing
requirement to test such units with an appropriately sized dedicated
condensing unit is representative of typical use. Additionally, as
discussed in the January 2012 final rule, any ACIMs designed only for
connection to remote compressor racks are out of the scope of DOE's
regulations. 77 FR 1591, 1600. Therefore, DOE is not proposing any
amendments to its test procedure to address such units.
Issue 30: DOE requests comment on its initial determination that
additional test setup and installation instructions are not required
for ACIMs with dedicated remote condensing units. DOE seeks information
and test data on the range of ACIM performance within the manufacturer-
recommended installation parameters to determine whether additional
requirements are needed to improve repeatability and reproducibility.
Issue 31: DOE requests comment on its proposal to not establish
test procedures for ACIMs intended for installation with a compressor
rack. DOE seeks information on the market availability of such
equipment, including how manufacturers currently test and rate these
units, and the extent to which they are installed with a compressor
rack rather than a dedicated condensing unit.
5. Modulating Capacity Ice Makers
An ice maker could be designed to be capable of operating at
multiple capacity levels, i.e., a ``modulating capacity ice maker.''
This modulation could be accomplished by using a single compressor with
multiple or variable capacities, using multiple compressors, or in some
other manner. In the January 2012 final rule, DOE did not establish a
test method for measuring the energy use or water consumption of
automatic commercial ice makers that are capable of operating at
multiple capacities. 77 FR 1591, 1601-1602. The decision to exclude
modulating capacity ice makers was based on the lack of existing ACIMs
with modulating capacity, as well as limited information regarding how
such equipment would function. Id.
In the March 2019 RFI, DOE requested comment on the availability of
modulating capacity ice makers in the market and, if any are av

[…truncated; see source link]

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on December 21, 2021.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.