Home/Federal/Federal Register/2024-25480

Proposed Rule2024-25480

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Residential and Commercial Clothes Washers and Consumer Clothes Dryers

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

November 5, 2024

Issuing agencies

Energy Department

Abstract

The U.S. Department of Energy ("DOE") proposes to amend the test procedures for residential and commercial clothes washers and consumer clothes dryers to update the test cloth specifications. DOE also proposes to reorganize the test procedures for improved readability. DOE is conducting this rulemaking to address specific issues and to make minor corrections to the current test procedures. However, this rulemaking does not satisfy the statutory requirement that, at least once every 7 years, DOE review the test procedures for clothes washers and consumer clothes dryers. DOE is seeking comment from interested parties on the proposal.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 214 (Tuesday, November 5, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 5, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 87803-87821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25480]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009]
RIN 1904-AF68

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Residential and
Commercial Clothes Washers and Consumer Clothes Dryers

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 procedures for residential and commercial clothes washers and
consumer clothes dryers to update the test cloth specifications. DOE
also proposes to reorganize the test procedures for improved
readability. DOE is conducting this rulemaking to address specific
issues and to make minor corrections to the current test procedures.
However, this rulemaking does not satisfy the statutory requirement
that, at least once every 7 years, DOE review the test procedures for
clothes washers and consumer clothes dryers. DOE is seeking comment
from interested parties on the proposal.

DATES:
Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding
this proposal no later than December 5, 2024.
Meeting: DOE will hold a public meeting on this NOPR if one is
requested by November 12, 2024. If a public meeting is requested, DOE
will announce its date and participation information on the DOE website
and via email.

[[Page 87804]]

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> under docket
number EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments,
identified by docket number EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009, by any of the
following methods:
(1) Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a3f4c2d0cbc6d1d0e7d1dac6d1d091939197f7f39393939ae3c6c68dc7ccc68dc4ccd5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="df88beacb7baadac9bada6baadacedefedeb8b8fefefefe69fbabaf1bbb0baf1b8b0a9">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. Include the docket
number EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009 in the subject line of the message.
(2) Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
(3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this
process, see section V of this document.
Docket: The docket for this activity, 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, not all documents listed in the index may be publicly
available, such as information that is exempt from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009</a>. The docket web page contains instructions on how
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See
section V of this document for information on how to submit comments
through <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Carl Shapiro, 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) 287-5649. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3f7e4f4f53565e515c5a6c4b5e515b5e4d5b4c6e4a5a4c4b5650514c7f5a5a115b505a11585049"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="327342425e5b535c51576146535c565340564163475741465b5d5c417257571c565d571c555d44">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.
Mr. Uchechukwu ``Emeka'' Eze, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4798. Email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6f1a0c070a0c071a04181a410a150a2f071e410b000a41080019">[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#3b7a4b4b57525a55585e684f5a555f5a495f486a4e5e484f525455487b5e5e155f545e155c544d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="18596868747179767b7d4b6c79767c796a7c6b496d7d6b6c7177766b587d7d367c777d367f776e">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the
following industry standard into 10 CFR part 430:
AATCC LP1-2021, Laboratory Procedure for Home Laundering: Machine
Washing, Revised 2023.
Copies of AATCC test methods can be obtained from the American
Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists (``AATCC''), P.O. Box
12215, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, (919) 549-3526, or
<a href="http://www.aatcc.org">www.aatcc.org</a>.
See section IV.M of this document for a further discussion of this
standard.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
C. Deviation From Process Rule
II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Applicability
B. Relevant Historical Background
C. Test Cloth Specifications and Requirements
1. Cut Orientation
2. Fabric Weight and Thread Count
3. Granite Weave
4. Alternate Test Cloth
5. Uniformity Criteria
6. Variance P-Value Threshold and Root-Mean-Square Error
D. Other Clarifying and Restructuring Edits
1. Introductory Paragraph
2. Pre-Conditioning Instructions
3. Harmonizing Clothes Washer and Clothes Dryer Test Procedures
4. Restructuring Appendix J3
E. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
F. Compliance Date
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
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. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

Consumer (residential) clothes washers (``RCWs''), commercial
clothes washers (``CCWs''), and consumer clothes dryers are included in
the list of ``covered products/equipment'' for which DOE is authorized
to establish and amend energy conservation standards and test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(7)-(8); 42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(H)) DOE's test
procedures for RCWs are currently prescribed at 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendices J (``appendix J'') and J2 (``appendix J2''). The
test procedures for CCWs must be the same as those established for
RCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(8)). DOE's test procedures for consumer
clothes dryers are currently prescribed at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendices D1 (``appendix D1'') and D2 (``appendix D2''). DOE also
prescribes specifications for the test cloth to be used for testing
clothes washers at appendix J3 to subpart B (``appendix J3''). The
following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish and amend test
procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers and relevant
background information regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures
for these products.

A. Authority

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, 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, as codified) Title III, Part B of EPCA \2\
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions

[[Page 87805]]

designed to improve energy efficiency. These products include RCWs and
consumer clothes dryers. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(7)-(8)) Title III, Part C
of EPCA,\3\ 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 CCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(H))
RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers are the subject of this
document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\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), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
\3\ 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 specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291; 42
U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293; 42 U.S.C. 6314),
labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294; 42 U.S.C. 6315), energy
conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295; 42 U.S.C. 6313), and the
authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42
U.S.C. 6296; 42 U.S.C. 6316).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered products/equipment must use as the basis for:
(1) certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable
energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6295(s); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)), and (2) making other representations about
the efficiency of those consumer products/equipment (42 U.S.C. 6293(c);
42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to
determine whether the products/equipment comply with relevant standards
promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a))
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products and
equipment established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and
regulations concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and
standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297; 42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b)) 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. 6297(d); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a))
Under 42 U.S.C. 6293 and 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the
criteria and procedures DOE must follow when prescribing or amending
test procedures for covered products/equipment. EPCA requires that any
test procedures prescribed or amended under this section be reasonably
designed to produce test results which measure energy efficiency,
energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product/
equipment during a representative average use cycle or period of use
and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered product and equipment,
including RCWs, CCWs and consumer clothes dryers, 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 or period of use. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(1)(A); 6314(a)(1))
If the Secretary determines, on her own behalf or in response to a
petition by any interested person, that a test procedure should be
prescribed or amended, the Secretary shall promptly publish in the
Federal Register proposed test procedures and afford interested persons
an opportunity to present oral and written data, views, and arguments
with respect to such procedures. The comment period on a proposed rule
to amend a test procedure shall be at least 60 days and may not exceed
270 days. In prescribing or amending a test procedure, the Secretary
shall take into account such information as the Secretary determines
relevant to such procedure, including technological developments
relating to energy use or energy efficiency of the type (or class) of
covered products involved. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)).
If DOE determines that test procedure revisions are not appropriate,
DOE must publish its determination not to amend the test procedures.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A)(ii); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a))
In addition, EPCA requires that DOE amend its test procedures for
all covered products to integrate measures of standby mode and off mode
energy consumption into the overall energy efficiency, energy
consumption, or other energy descriptor, unless the current test
procedure already incorporates the standby mode and off mode energy
consumption, or if such integration is technically infeasible. (42
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(i)-(ii)) \4\ If an integrated test procedure is
technically infeasible, DOE must prescribe separate standby mode and
off mode energy use test procedures for the covered product, if a
separate test is technically feasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)(ii))
Any such amendment must consider the most current versions of the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62301 \5\ and
IEC Standard 62087 \6\ as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ EPCA does not contain an analogous provision for commercial
equipment.
\5\ IEC 62301, Household electrical appliances--Measurement of
standby power (Edition 2.0, 2011-01).
\6\ IEC 62087, Audio, video and related equipment--Methods of
measurement for power consumption (Edition 1.0, Parts 1-6: 2015,
Part 7: 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

EPCA requires the test procedures for CCWs to be the same as the
test procedures established for RCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(8)) As with
the test procedures for RCWs, EPCA requires that DOE evaluate, at least
once every 7 years, the test procedures for CCWs 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))
DOE is publishing this notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') to
address specific issues and to make minor corrections to the current
test procedures that are required for certification of compliance with
applicable energy conservation standards. However, this rulemaking does
not satisfy the EPCA requirement that, at least once every 7 years, DOE
review the test procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A); 6314(a)(1)(A))

B. Background

As discussed, DOE's existing test procedures for clothes washers
are prescribed at appendix J and appendix J2,\7\ and DOE's existing
test procedures for consumer clothes dryers are

[[Page 87806]]

prescribed at appendix D1 and appendix D2.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ Manufacturers must use the results of testing under appendix
J2 to determine compliance with the current relevant standards for
RCWs at 10 CFR 430.32(g)(1) and for CCWs at 10 CFR 431.156(b).
Manufacturers must use the results of testing under appendix J to
determine compliance with the relevant standards for RCWs
manufactured on or after March 1, 2028, specified at 10 CFR
430.32(g)(2) and with any amended standards for CCWs provided in 10
CFR 431.156 that are published after January 1, 2022.
\8\ The test procedures in appendix D1 or appendix D2 must be
used to determine compliance with the current relevant standards for
consumer clothes dryers at 10 CFR 430.32(h)(3). Manufacturers must
use the test procedure in appendix D2 to determine compliance with
the relevant standards for consumer clothes dryers manufactured on
or after March 1, 2028, specified at 10 CFR 430.32(h)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additionally, DOE's existing test procedure at appendix J3 provides
specifications for the test cloth to be used for testing clothes
washers; procedures for pre-conditioning new test cloth; procedures for
verifying that new lots \9\ of test cloth meet the defined material
specifications; and procedures for developing a set of correction
coefficients that correlate the measured remaining moisture content
(``RMC'') values of each new test cloth lot with a set of standard RMC
values established as a historical reference point. These correction
coefficients are applied to the RMC measurements performed during
testing according to appendix J or appendix J2, ensuring consistency in
the final corrected RMC measurement across different test cloth lots
used for testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ The term ``lot'' refers to a quantity of cloth that has been
manufactured with the same batches of cotton and polyester during
one continuous process. Section 2 of appendix J3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although the test cloth specifications and qualification procedures
in appendix J3 are nominally applicable to clothes washer testing, DOE
understands that manufacturers and test laboratories use the same test
cloth for testing clothes dryers as well. As discussed further in
section III.B of this document, the test cloth specifications for
clothes washer testing and clothes dryer testing have historically been
aligned. Furthermore, as discussed further in section III.D.3 of this
document, test cloth that satisfies the requirements of appendix J3 for
clothes washer testing also satisfies the requirements codified in
appendices D1 and D2 for clothes dryer testing.
The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (``AHAM'') has
established a Test Cloth Task Force (``AHAM task force'') that, among
other responsibilities, reviews and recommends new lots of test cloth
for industry use; identifies and secures suppliers for manufacturing
test cloth; conducts research and investigations to recommend
continuous improvements to the test cloth specifications and
qualification procedures; and addresses any industry-wide concerns that
may arise regarding the test cloth. DOE representatives participate in
the AHAM task force.
On May 31, 2024, DOE received a letter from AHAM (``May 2024 AHAM
Letter'') urging DOE to allow the use of alternate test cloth material
for clothes washer and clothes dryer testing. (No. 1 at p. 4) \10\ The
May 2024 AHAM Letter also made further requests for DOE to amend
certain test cloth specifications based on the results of recent
investigations by the AHAM task force. (Id.) In this document, DOE
proposes to implement changes to its test cloth specifications to
address these concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ A parenthetical reference at the end of a quotation or
paraphrase of an AHAM letter provides reference for information
located in the docket of this rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2024-BT-
TP-0009, which is maintained at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>). The references
are arranged as follows: (docket ID number at the page of that
document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Deviation From Process Rule

In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C,
appendix A (``Process Rule''), DOE notes that it is deviating from
certain provisions in the Process Rule as follows.
Section 8(a) of the Process Rule states that in determining whether
to consider establishing or amending any test procedure, DOE will
publish one or more preliminary documents in the Federal Register
(e.g., a request for information or notice of data availability)
intended to gather information on key issues. As discussed, DOE is
conducting this rulemaking to address specific issues rather than
conducting a full review of the clothes washer and clothes dryer test
procedures that would satisfy the 7-year lookback requirement
prescribed by EPCA. This proposal seeks to address known issues
regarding test cloth that have been brought to DOE's attention, as
discussed in the previous section of this document. For these reasons,
DOE finds it appropriate to deviate from this provision in the Process
Rule by forgoing publication of a preliminary document as part of a
pre-NOPR stage for this rulemaking.
Section 8(b)(2) of the Process Rule states that there will be not
less than 60 days for public comment on the NOPR, with at least one
public hearing or workshop. As stated, DOE will hold a public meeting
on this NOPR if one is requested; otherwise, DOE finds it appropriate
to forgo a public hearing given the limited scope of issues addressed
in this NOPR. DOE has also determined that 30 days is an appropriate
period for providing comments.

II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

In this NOPR, DOE proposes amendments to its test cloth
specifications as follows:
(1) Specify that fabric weight and thread count must be measured on
finished goods prior to pre-conditioning,
(2) Clarify that the test cloth be made with a ``granite,''
``momie,'' or ``crepe'' weave,
(3) Allow the use of an alternate test cloth,
(4) Amend the statistical criteria for a new test cloth lot to be
considered acceptable for use,
(5) Restructure and renumber certain sections of appendix J3 for
clarity, and
(6) Harmonize the test cloth specifications for clothes washers and
clothes dryers.
DOE's proposed actions are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the
current test procedures as well as the reason for the proposed change.

Table II.1--Summary of Changes in Proposed Test Procedures Relative to
Current Test Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed test
Current DOE test procedures procedures Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not specify at which Specifies that Industry request;
stage of the process the fabric weight and improve
fabric weight and thread thread count must reproducibility of
count of test cloth are be measured on test results.
applicable. finished goods
prior to pre-
conditioning.
Specifies the use of Specifies the use of Industry request;
``granite or momie'' weave. ``granite, momie, clarification of
or crepe'' weave. existing
requirement.
Specifies one type of Specifies two types Industry request;
allowable test cloth. of allowable test reduce test burden
cloth. while maintaining
reproducibility and
representativeness.

[[Page 87807]]

Specifies that the Specifies that the Reduce test burden
coefficient of variation coefficient of while maintaining
across nine RMC values must variation across reproducibility and
be less than or equal to 1 nine RMC values representativeness.
percent. must be less than
or equal to 2.0
percent.
Specifies that the P-value Specifies that the Reduce test burden
of the RMC correction curve root-mean-square while maintaining
must be greater than or error of the RMC reproducibility and
equal to 0.1. correction curve representativeness.
must be less than
or equal to 0.015.
Appendix J3 test cloth Harmonizes test Industry request;
specifications currently cloth requirements clarify existing
apply only to clothes across both clothes requirements
washers. washers and clothes consistent with
dryers and extends industry practice.
applicability of
appendix J3 test
cloth
specifications to
both clothes
washers and clothes
dryers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE has tentatively determined that the proposed amendments
described in section III of this document would not alter the measured
efficiency of RCWs, CCWs, or consumer clothes dryers, or require
retesting or recertification solely as a result of DOE's adoption of
the proposed amendments to the test procedures, if finalized. (42
U.S.C. 6293(e)) Discussion of DOE's proposed actions are addressed in
detail in section III of this document.

III. Discussion

In the following sections, DOE proposes certain amendments to its
test procedures for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers. For each
proposed amendment, DOE provides relevant background information,
explains why the amendment merits consideration, discusses relevant
public comments, and proposes a potential approach.

A. Scope of Applicability

This rulemaking applies to clothes washers (both RCWs and CCWs,
which use the same test procedures) \11\ and consumer clothes dryers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ The test procedures for CCWs must be the same as those
established for RCWs. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(8)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE has defined a clothes washer as a consumer product designed to
clean clothes, utilizing a water solution of soap and/or detergent and
mechanical agitation or other movement, that must be one of the
following classes: automatic clothes washers,\12\ semi-automatic
clothes washers,\13\ and other clothes washers.\14\ 10 CFR 430.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ An ``automatic clothes washer'' is a class of clothes
washer that has a control system that is capable of scheduling a
preselected combination of operations, such as regulation of water
temperature, regulation of the water fill level, and performance of
wash, rinse, drain, and spin functions without the need for user
intervention subsequent to the initiation of machine operation. Some
models may require user intervention to initiate these different
segments of the cycle after the machine has begun operation, but
they do not require the user to intervene to regulate the water
temperature by adjusting the external water faucet valves. 10 CFR
430.2.
\13\ A ``semi-automatic clothes washer'' is a class of clothes
washer that is the same as an automatic clothes washer except that
user intervention is required to regulate the water temperature by
adjusting the external water faucet valves. Id.
\14\ ``Other clothes washer'' means a class of clothes washer
that is not an automatic or semi-automatic clothes washer. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE regulations also define ``electric clothes dryer'' and ``gas
clothes dryer'' similarly as a cabinet-like appliance designed to dry
fabrics in a tumble-type drum with forced air circulation, with
blower(s) driven by an electric motor(s) and either electricity or gas,
respectively, as the heat source. See, 10 CFR 430.2. DOE's clothes
dryer test procedures are applicable to both electric and gas clothes
dryers.

A commercial clothes washer is defined as a soft-mount front-
loading or soft-mount top-loading clothes washer that--
(A) Has a clothes container compartment that--
(i) For horizontal-axis clothes washers, is not more than 3.5
cubic feet; and
(ii) For vertical-axis clothes washers, is not more than 4.0
cubic feet; and
(B) Is designed for use in--
(i) Applications in which the occupants of more than one
household will be using the clothes washer, such as multi-family
housing common areas and coin laundries; or
(ii) Other commercial applications.

(42 U.S.C. 6311(21); 10 CFR 431.452)
DOE is not proposing changes to the scope of the RCW, CCW, or
consumer clothes dryer test procedures, or the relevant definitions, in
this NOPR.

B. Relevant Historical Background

This section summarizes the historical background of test cloth
specifications in DOE's clothes washer and clothes dryer test
procedures that is relevant to topics discussed in this NOPR.
DOE first introduced the use of test cloth into the original
clothes dryer test procedure established by the final rule published
September 14, 1977 (``September 1977 Clothes Dryer Final Rule''). 42 FR
46145. The test cloth specifications were a 50-percent cotton and 50-
percent polyester blended material, representative of the range of
fabrics comprising consumer wash loads. Id. at 42 FR 46146. The
September 1977 Clothes Dryer Final Rule also established a maximum use
of 25 clothes dryer test cycles for each piece of test cloth to reduce
potential variability in the test results that may occur from any
change in the composition of the test cloth due to continued drying of
the same test cloth. Id.
DOE introduced the use of test cloth into the original clothes
washer test procedure established by the final rule published September
28, 1977 (``September 1977 Clothes Washer Final Rule''). 42 FR 49802.
As discussed in the September 1977 Clothes Washer Final Rule, the size
and composition of the test load was chosen to be identical to the test
load that had been specified for clothes dryers in the September 1977
Clothes Dryer Final Rule. Id. at 49 FR 49805. The number of test runs
for each piece of test cloth was limited to no more than 25 clothes
washer test cycles. Id. at 49 FR 49808.
Since introducing the use of test cloth into the originally
established clothes dryer and clothes washer test procedures, DOE has
periodically updated the test cloth specifications and requirements.
The following paragraphs summarize some of these changes to test cloth
specifications and requirements that are relevant to the amendments
proposed in this document.
In a final rule published May 19, 1981 (``May 1981 Final Rule''),
DOE amended the clothes dryer test procedure to, among other changes,
establish test cloth pre-conditioning requirements to improve test
repeatability by ensuring that the test cloth not contain any water-
soluble sizing or finishing agents that could affect the moisture
performance of

[[Page 87808]]

test cloth. 46 FR 27324. The May 1981 Final Rule also established a
weight tolerance on the test cloth. Id.
In a final rule published August 27, 1997, DOE amended its test
cloth requirements in the clothes washer test procedure by adding a new
requirement to prewash (i.e., pre-condition) new test cloth prior to
first use for energy consumption testing. 62 FR 45484.
DOE published a final rule on January 12, 2001 (``January 2001
Final Rule'') that, among other changes to the clothes washer test
procedure, introduced the modified energy factor descriptor, which
incorporated an estimate of clothes drying energy into the clothes
washer efficiency descriptor through consideration of the RMC of the
clothes leaving the clothes washer. 66 FR 3314. As discussed in the
January 2001 Final Rule, it had been discovered that the test cloth to
be used for determining the RMC was giving inconsistent results. Id. at
66 FR 3317. DOE investigated possible causes for the inconsistent test
results and summarized the results in a report published in May 2000
titled Development of a Standardized Energy Test Cloth for Measuring
Remaining Moisture Content in a Residential Clothes Washer (``May 2000
Test Cloth Report'').\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ The May 2000 Test Cloth Report is available at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2006-STD-0064-0277">www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2006-STD-0064-0277</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In particular, relevant to topics discussed in this NOPR, the May
2000 Test Cloth Report documented the difficulty of relating
specifiable test cloth characteristics--fiber content, weight, etc.--to
RMC measurements. (See section 4 of May 2000 Test Cloth Report). On
this basis, DOE concluded that tighter test cloth specifications alone
would not necessarily lead to comparably consistent RMC measurements.
To provide more consistent RMC measurements from lot to lot, the May
2000 Test Cloth Report proposed a new method for developing a
``correction factor'' for each new lot of test cloth. The correction
factor would be applied to the RMC measurement to normalize the RMC
results to match the RMC performance of a designated ``standard lot.''
The May 2000 Test Cloth Report also concluded that a viable
approach to minimize the effects of test cloth variation on RMC would
be to consistently specify a single type of fabric that is produced
frequently by one mill to a consistent set of specifications. The
report recommended the use of a 50-percent cotton/50-percent polyester
momie weave fabric from one particular mill as a suitable choice,
noting that this cloth (at the time) was produced in high volume, had
been produced to a consistent specification for many years, and was
likely to continue to be produced on this basis for the foreseeable
future. (See section 6 of May 2000 Test Cloth Report)
The May 2000 Test Cloth Report recommended a set of test cloth
specifications and an RMC correction factor approach that could be
adopted into the DOE test procedure. The January 2001 Final Rule
incorporated into the clothes washer test procedures many of the
recommendations of the May 2000 Test Cloth Report, including the
recommended updates to the test cloth specifications and the RMC
correction factor procedure. The January 2001 Final Rule also increased
the number of allowable test runs for each piece of test cloth to no
more than 60 clothes washer test cycles (from 25 previously). 66 FR
3314, 3320.
DOE published a direct final rule on October 31, 2003 (``October
2003 Final Rule'') that, among other changes to the clothes washer test
procedure, added as a testing requirement the use of a statistical
analysis approach to qualify any interactive effect between different
lots of test cloth and spin speeds to further improve consistency of
the RMC measurement. 68 FR 62198.
On March 7, 2012, DOE published a final rule (``March 2012 Final
Rule'') that, among other changes, updated certain test cloth
specifications for clothes washer testing based on recommendations
provided by AHAM. 77 FR 13888, 13920-13921. Specifically, the March
2012 Final Rule adopted definitions for cloth ``lot'' and ``roll'' and
established test cloth weight tolerances. Id. at 77 FR 13921-13922. The
March 2012 Final Rule also updated pre-conditioning wash requirements
and incorporated American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists
(``AATCC'') test methods for verifying the absence of water-repellent
finishes on the test cloth. Id. at 77 FR 13922.
In a final rule published on August 5, 2015 (``August 2015 Final
Rule''), DOE moved the standard extractor RMC procedure for developing
the correction factors for each new test cloth lot from appendix J2 to
the newly created appendix J3. 80 FR 46730.
In a final rule published on June 1, 2022 (``June 2022 Final
Rule''), among other changes, DOE further consolidated clothes washer
test cloth-related provisions into appendix J3 (from appendix J2) to
improve the overall logical flow of both test procedures. Id. at 87 FR
33367. DOE additionally codified in appendix J3 a test cloth material
verification procedure that had historically been used by the AHAM task
force when evaluating new lots of test cloth. Id. at 87 FR 33368.

C. Test Cloth Specifications and Requirements

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to update its test cloth
specifications and requirements to (1) further improve consistency in
test results across different lots of test cloth, (2) clarify certain
requirements consistent with textile industry nomenclature, (3) allow
the use of an alternate type of test cloth that has been shown to
exhibit consistent performance with the current test cloth, and (4)
reevaluate appropriate thresholds for certain statistical requirements
specified for new lots of test cloth.
Each of the proposed changes are in line with DOE's historical
practice of regularly updating its test cloth specifications to improve
the consistency of test results and adapt to changes in material
specifications and availability of commercially available textiles.
In this section, DOE addresses clothes washer specifications in
appendix J3 specifically. In section III.D.3 of this document, DOE
proposes harmonizing the clothes washer and clothes dryer test cloth
specifications such that the edits proposed in this section would apply
to both product types.
1. Cut Orientation
Section 3.1 of appendix J3 specifies that the test cloth material
should come from a roll of material with a width of approximately 63
inches, although other sizes may be used if the test cloth material
meets the specifications listed in sections 3.2 through 3.6 of appendix
J3. Section 3.7.1 of appendix J3 specifies the dimensions of the
individual energy test cloths--nominally 24 inches by 36 inches prior
to hemming.\16\ Furthermore, section 5 of appendix J3 specifies that
the maximum shrinkage requirements for the energy test cloth after pre-
conditioning \17\ must not be more than 5 percent of the length and
width.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\16\ Section 3.7.2 of appendix J3 specifies dimensions of
smaller energy ``stuffer'' cloths, which are nominally 12 inches by
12 inches prior to hemming. Since the energy stuffer cloths are
square, the consideration of cut orientation in this section of the
document pertains only to the rectangular energy test cloths.
\17\ The pre-conditioning process is specified in section 5 of
appendix J3 and consists of five wash-rinse-spin cycles, with the
load bone-dried between each of the five cycles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix J3 does not specify the orientation of the rectangular

[[Page 87809]]

dimensions (i.e., lengthwise versus widthwise) for cutting individual
energy test cloths from the roll of fabric. As such, the cut
orientation of the rectangular energy test cloths can be optimized to
minimize wasted fabric (e.g., a lengthwise cut of 36 inches adjacent to
a widthwise cut of 24 inches could be patterned on a 63-inch width roll
of material with minimal waste).
The May 2024 AHAM Letter recommended that appendix J3 specify that
the energy test cloth be cut in a specific orientation relative to the
fabric roll. (No. 1 at p. 4) Specifically, the May 2024 AHAM Letter
suggested that the 24-inch dimension be cut from the lengthwise (i.e.,
``warp'') direction of the roll and the 36-inch dimension be cut from
the widthwise (i.e., ``weft'') direction of the roll, as depicted in
Figure III.1. (Id. at p. 23)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP05NO24.000

DOE understands through discussions of the AHAM task force that
differences in cut orientation can impact the relative shrinking of
cloth in each direction after repeated wash and dry cycles, which could
potentially affect its water absorption and retention properties--
characteristics that are particularly relevant to the RMC
measurement.\18\ The May 2024 AHAM Letter did not, however, provide any
data or quantitative evaluation of whether, or to what extent, the
direction of cut orientation could affect the shrinkage of the energy
test cloth, or the RMC measurement in the clothes washer test
procedure. DOE notes that even if the cut orientation could impact the
relative shrinkage of the length and width of the energy test cloth,
section 5 of appendix J3 already specifies a maximum allowable
shrinkage of 5 percent in each direction. DOE has no information to
suggest that any variation in shrinkage within this 5 percent tolerance
would have a substantive impact on the resulting RMC measurement in the
clothes washer test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\18\ As discussed, RMC is a measure of the remaining water
content of the clothes washer load at the end of the wash cycle and
is used to incorporate an estimate of clothes drying energy into the
clothes washer efficiency descriptor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Furthermore, DOE is concerned about potential unintended
consequences of requiring a specific cut orientation for each energy
test cloth. Depending on the width of the fabric roll, specifying a cut
orientation as suggested by AHAM could prevent the optimization of cut
patterns as described previously (i.e., a 36-inch lengthwise cut
adjacent to a 24-inch widthwise cut on a 63-inch width roll of
material), resulting in increased fabric waste and a corresponding
increase in material cost. For instance, a 63-inch-wide roll as
specified by section 3.1 of appendix J3 would only be able to
accommodate a single 36-inch wide cut as suggested by AHAM, resulting
in nearly 40 percent of the roll material being wasted. And although
section 3.1 of appendix J3 permits the use of other size rolls, DOE
understands that textiles are typically woven in standardized widths
and is concerned that fabricating rolls with a custom width for DOE
test cloth could increase the material cost.
In summary, DOE is uncertain as to whether, or to what extent, the
energy test cloth cut orientation could impact the RMC measurement in
the clothes washer test procedure, and whether specifying a particular
cut orientation could result in fabric waste that would lead to an
increase in material cost. As such, DOE requests comment to clarify
these uncertainties, as provided at the end of this section. If DOE
were to be provided with additional information that alleviates these
uncertainties and concerns, DOE would consider establishing a cut
orientation requirement in a final rule.
Irrespective of its determination regarding the specification of a
cut orientation requirement, DOE has tentatively determined that
section 3.1

[[Page 87810]]

of appendix J3 is superfluous, given that the suggested parameters
regarding the width and length dimensions of the roll (i.e., a roll
width of approximately 63 inches and approximately 500 yards per roll)
are rendered moot by the accompanying provision allowing for rolls of
other sizes to be used. As such, DOE proposes to remove section 3.1 of
appendix J3 and renumber the subsequent sections accordingly.
DOE requests comment on the roll dimensions and cut orientations
that are currently used to fabricate DOE test cloth.
DOE requests comment as to whether, or to what extent, the energy
test cloth cut orientation could impact the RMC measurement in the
clothes washer test procedure.
DOE requests comment on its concern that establishing a cut
orientation requirement could lead to fabric waste, depending on the
dimensions of the fabric roll.
DOE requests comment on its tentative determination not to specify
a cut orientation requirement. DOE further seeks comment on whether it
should adopt the cut orientation requirement specified by AHAM or any
other cut orientation requirement.
DOE requests comment on its tentative determination that section
3.1 of appendix J3 is superfluous and its proposal to remove the
requirements in section 3.1 of appendix J3.
2. Fabric Weight and Thread Count
Section 3.3 of appendix J3 specifies that the fabric weight of the
test cloth must be 5.60 <plus-minus> 0.25 ounces per square yard, but
it does not specify at what point in the fabrication process this
specification applies. Similarly, section 3.4 of appendix J3 specifies
that the thread count of the test cloth must be 65 x 57 threads per
inch <plus-minus> 2 percent, but it does not specify at what point in
the fabrication process this specification applies. The May 2024 AHAM
Letter requested that DOE amend these specifications to clarify that
fabric weight and thread count specifications apply to ``finished
goods'' test cloth prior to pre-conditioning. (No. 1 at pp. 4, 22)
Through its participation in the AHAM task force, DOE understands the
term ``finished goods'' to mean after the cloth has been hemmed into
energy test cloth and energy stuffer cloths, but prior to any pre-
conditioning.
DOE further understands through its participation in the AHAM task
force that specifying that these requirements apply to finished goods
(as opposed to prior to the cloth having been processed, de-starched,
and hemmed), but prior to any pre-conditioning, is the most appropriate
point in the cloth fabrication process because these dimensional
properties can change during certain stages of the cloth fabrication
process. Applying these specifications to finished goods therefore
ensures the consistency of each test cloth lot at the state in which
the test cloth is purchased by a manufacturer or test laboratory.
Consistent with AHAM's recommendation, DOE proposes to specify
within section 3 of appendix J3 that fabric weight and thread count
specifications apply to finished goods prior to pre-conditioning.
DOE requests feedback on its proposal to specify in appendix J3
that fabric weight and thread count specifications apply to finished
goods prior to pre-conditioning.
3. Granite Weave
Section 3.2 of appendix J3 states that the test cloth used for
clothes washer testing must be a pure finished bleached cloth, made
with a momie or granite weave. As discussed in the May 2024 AHAM
Letter, recent lots 25A and 25B \19\ were woven with a different type
of granite weave--a ``crepe'' weave--than the ``momie'' type of granite
weave that has historically been used for DOE test cloth. (No. 1 at p.
3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\19\ The AHAM task force designated the two most recent lots of
test cloth ``25A'' and ``25B'' to reflect that these two lots were
manufactured at the same time using the same continuous weaving
process, although they were finished in separate batch processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To evaluate whether using a crepe weave would impact test results
compared to the historical momie weave, DOE conducted comparative
testing of RCWs and consumer clothes dryers using lot 25A (made with a
crepe weave) and previous test cloth lot 23 (made with a momie weave).
The results of DOE's testing are presented in a Technical Appendix
published in the docket for this rulemaking.\20\ This testing shows no
substantive variation in RMC, integrated modified energy factor
(``IMEF''), or integrated water factor--the reported metrics for RCWs--
or in combined energy factor--the reported metric for consumer clothes
dryers--between the different granite weave types (i.e., traditional
momie versus crepe weave). Although DOE's test sample did not include
any CCWs, DOE expects that the trends in RMC values, energy use, and
water use that it observed in RCWs would apply to CCWs, given that RCWs
and CCWs are designed and operate similarly and are tested using the
same test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\20\ The docket web page can be found at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Through its participation in discussions with the AHAM task force,
DOE understands that very few textile mills maintain the capability to
fabricate cloth using the type of momie weave that has traditionally
been used to produce DOE test cloth. Instead, the type of crepe weave
used for lot 25A is expected to be more readily available going
forward. In recognition of this, DOE is proposing to add the term
``crepe'' to the list of allowable weaves--specifically, to revise
newly renumbered section 3.1.1.1 of appendix J3 to specify that the
test cloth be made with a momie, granite, or crepe weave.
DOE requests feedback on its proposal to add the term ``crepe'' to
the list of allowable weaves in appendix J3.
Appendix J3 currently does not define the terms momie or granite
weave. In the May 2024 AHAM Letter, AHAM suggested that DOE establish
definitions for these terms in appendix J3.\21\ (No. 1 at pp. 21-22)
Through its participation in the AHAM task force, DOE understands that
momie, granite, and crepe weave types are generally understood terms of
art within the textile industry, but there is not a definitive source
for definitions of these terms. DOE is concerned that creating its own
definitions for these terms could inadvertently conflict with the range
of weave styles that are generally understood by the textile industry
to be granite weaves. Therefore, DOE has tentatively determined not to
establish a definition for these terms within the appendix J3 test
procedure. DOE would consider establishing definitions for one or more
of these terms--including the definitions suggested by AHAM--if
interested parties were to demonstrate sufficient justification that
would alleviate the concerns expressed herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\21\ AHAM suggested defining ``granite weave'' as a broad
classification of weave producing a small, irregular, pebbled
surface similar to crepe fabrics; fabrics made with a granite weave
are generally interlaced tightly, and warp and filling yarns appear
on the face. AHAM suggested defining ``momie/granite weave fabric''
as test cloth made with granite weave fabric as specified in the
suggested definition of granite weave.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE requests feedback on its tentative determination not to
establish definitions for ``crepe,'' ``granite,'' or ``momie'' weave in
appendix J3.
4. Alternate Test Cloth
DOE is required to ensure that the test procedure is reasonably
designed to produce test results that measure energy efficiency, energy
use, water use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered
product/equipment during a

[[Page 87811]]

representative average use cycle or period of use and is not unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) In
establishing the current test cloth specifications, DOE considered the
representativeness of the range of fabrics comprising consumer wash
loads, the manufacturability of the fabric, the consistency in test
cloth production, and the consistency in test results from the fabric.
66 FR 3314, 3318 (Jan. 12, 2001).
As discussed, the current test cloth specifications were
recommended by the May 2000 Test Cloth Report, which noted that this
cloth (at the time) was produced in high volume, had been produced to a
consistent specification for many years, and was likely to continue to
be produced on this basis for the foreseeable future. (See section 6 of
May 2000 Test Cloth Report.) The May 2000 Test Cloth Report also
highlighted the benefits of specifying a single type of fabric that is
produced frequently by one mill to a consistent set of specifications.
However, while the test cloth specified in appendix J3 continues to
be produced by a single supplier, DOE understands through its
participation in the AHAM task force that this cloth is produced
exclusively for use in conducting the DOE test procedure (i.e., this
specific cloth is not used to any significant extent by any other
industry bodies or for any other regulatory or research and development
purposes). As such, it is no longer the case that this cloth is
produced in high volume (beyond the volume needed for DOE testing
purposes), leading to uncertainty as to whether this cloth is likely to
remain readily available on a consistent basis for the foreseeable
future.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the laundry industry experienced
shortages in DOE test cloth supply.\22\ The specialized nature of the
DOE test cloth (i.e., the fact the cloth is unique to DOE testing needs
and produced in relatively low volumes) inhibited the ability to
identify alternate sources of supply for the test cloth. To mitigate
this shortage, AHAM requested that DOE use its enforcement discretion
to allow extended use of test cloth beyond the currently defined cycle
limits.\23\ On September 28, 2023, DOE issued a statement \24\ stating
that DOE would exercise its enforcement discretion and not impose civil
penalties on a clothes washer, commercial clothes washer, or clothes
dryer manufacturer for certifying compliance with DOE's energy
conservation standards based on testing that exceeds the maximum test
cloth run provision set forth in the DOE test procedures. Instead, DOE
allowed for usage of test cloth for twice the number of runs allowed in
the relevant test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\22\ AHAM informed DOE on March 3, 2022 that there were
significant issues with the quality and availability of the required
test cloth material for the applicable energy tests for clothes
washers and clothes dryers.
\23\ On August 7, 2023, AHAM informed DOE that test cloth
shortages were persisting and that this supply shortage could also
eventually impact DOE's ability to conduct assessment, enforcement,
or other testing.
\24\ Available at <a href="http://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-09/Test%20Cloth%20Policy%20for%20Clothes%20Washers%20and%20Clothes%20Dryers%20Enforcement%20Policy.pdf">www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-09/Test%20Cloth%20Policy%20for%20Clothes%20Washers%20and%20Clothes%20Dryers%20Enforcement%20Policy.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In an effort to further alleviate any test cloth supply constraints
that could limit energy testing activities for clothes washers and
clothes dryers, the AHAM task force evaluated the potential merits of
specifying an alternate test cloth that could be used for DOE testing,
as discussed in the May 2024 AHAM Letter. (No. 1 at p. 3)
The AHAM task force identified a commercially available
standardized fabric as a possible alternative to the current test cloth
specification. This fabric is used as ``ballast'' for testing specific
material attributes (such as colorfastness) of textiles and, according
to the May 2024 AHAM Letter, has been used by the textile industry for
over 80 years. (No. 1 at p. 3) Specifically, the fabric meets the
specifications of Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth specified by industry
standard AATCC LP1-2021, Laboratory Procedure for Home Laundering:
Machine Washing.\25\ The specifications for Laundering Ballast Type 3
cloth are provided in Table III.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\25\ Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021 provides specifications for
various types of cloth, one of which is designated as Laundering
Ballast Type 3.

Table III.1--Specifications for Laundering Ballast Type 3 Cloth From
AATCC LP1-2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Specification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiber Content..................... 50% cotton/50% polyester <plus-
minus>3%.
Greige Fabric Yarns............... 16/1 or 30/2 ring spun.
Greige Fabric Construction........ 52 x 48 <plus-minus> 5 yarns per
inch, plain weave.
Finished Fabric Weight............ 155 <plus-minus> 10 grams per square
meter (4.57 <plus-minus> 0.29
ounces per square yard).
Edges............................. All edges hemmed or over-edged.
Finished Piece Size............... 920 x 920 <plus-minus> 30
millimeters (36.0 x 36.0 <plus-
minus> 1 inch).
Finished Piece Weight............. 130 <plus-minus> 10 grams (4.59
<plus-minus> 0.35 ounces).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As part of an AHAM task force investigation, DOE and AHAM members
conducted comparative testing of Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth \26\
to evaluate whether this cloth could be used to conduct the DOE test
procedures and whether doing so would produce test results comparable
to the currently specified test cloth. The results of DOE's testing are
presented in the Technical Appendix published in the docket for this
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ The tested cloth used 16/1 fabric yarns and was sized to
match the DOE energy test cloth and energy stuffer cloth dimensions
and hemming instructions (as currently specified in section 3.7.1
and 3.7.2 of appendix J3, respectively) instead of the finished
piece dimensions specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Specifically, DOE tested six RCWs and eight consumer clothes
dryers, representing eight manufacturers and all major product classes;
AHAM members additionally conducted testing of eight RCWs and six
consumer clothes dryers, representing all major product classes. These
products were tested to their rated appendix (D1, D2, or J2) using both
the current DOE test cloth and the Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth.
DOE's testing demonstrated no substantive difference in measured
efficiency compared with historical lots used for RCW and consumer
clothes dryer testing. In particular for clothes washers, the
Laundering Ballast Type 3 produced RMC results comparable to existing
DOE test cloth using the currently specified correction factor
approach. Although DOE's test sample did not include any CCWs, DOE
expects that the trends in RMC values, energy use, and water use that
it observed in RCWs would apply to CCWs, given that RCWs and CCWs are
designed and

[[Page 87812]]

operate similarly and are tested using the same test procedure.
In addition, AHAM presented the results of its members' testing in
appendix A to the May 2024 AHAM Letter. (No. 1 at pp. 6-9) This testing
also demonstrated no substantive difference in measured efficiency
compared with historical lots used for RCW and consumer clothes dryer
testing.
Based on this data, DOE has tentatively determined that the AATCC
Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth provides results that are equally as
representative as results obtained using the currently specified test
cloth. On this basis, DOE is proposing, consistent with recommendations
from the May 2024 AHAM Letter, to amend appendix J3 to allow for the
use of AATCC Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth, with a specific yarn
size, and cut and hemmed to the DOE energy test cloth dimensions. (No.
1 at p. 22) As discussed in section III.D.3 of this document, the
specifications in appendix J3 would apply to both clothes washers and
clothes dryers.
Specifically, DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference AATCC
LP1-2021 into appendix J3 and to allow the use of test cloth meeting
the specifications of Laundering Ballast Type 3, as specified in Table
VII of AATCC LP1-2021, with the following additional specifications and
substitutions:

<bullet> Greige Fabric Yarns: Type 16/1 only \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\27\ As discussed previously, comparative testing was conducted
only on fabric with 16/1 yarn type, which is a single-string yarn
similar in thickness to the 15/1 yarn type currently specified in
section 3.5 of appendix J3. No testing was conducted on fabric with
30/2 yarn type--the other fabric yarn option specified in Table VII
of AATCC LP1-2021--which is a two-string version of yarn with each
string roughly half the diameter of the single-string version.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

<bullet> Edges: All edges hemmed only \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\28\ As discussed previously, comparative testing was conducted
only on fabric matching the hemming instructions currently specified
in sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of appendix J3. No testing was conducted
on over-edged pieces of test cloth (i.e., the other edging option
specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

<bullet> Finished Piece Size: Dimensions in accordance with
sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of appendix J3 for energy test cloths and
energy stuffer cloths, respectively.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\29\ As discussed previously, comparative testing was conducted
only on fabric matching the dimensions currently specified in
sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of appendix J3. No testing was conducted on
fabric pieces matching the dimensions as specified in Table VII of
AATCC LP1-2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

<bullet> Finished Piece Weight: Disregard \30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\30\ The Finished Piece Weight specified in Table VII of AATCC
LP1-2021 corresponds to the Finished Piece Size specified in the
same table; as such, this specification does not apply to fabric
pieces matching the proposed finished piece dimensions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE requests comment on its proposal to allow the use of Laundering
Ballast Type 3 cloth specified in AATCC LP1-2021 (with certain
additional specifications) as an alternate test cloth for conducting
clothes washer and clothes dryer testing.
Consistent with the discussion in section III.C.3 of this document,
DOE considered whether to propose a definition for ``plain weave'' as
specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021. DOE understands the term
``plain weave'' to be a well-understood term of art and therefore
tentatively determines that adding a definition of ``plain weave'' to
appendix J3 would not be warranted.
DOE requests feedback on its tentative determination not to
establish a definition for ``plain weave'' in appendix J3.
5. Uniformity Criteria
In the June 2022 Final Rule, DOE codified a prequalification
procedure to be performed on each new lot of test cloth to verify the
uniformity of the test cloth throughout the beginning, middle, and end
of the lot. 87 FR 33316. As discussed in the June 2022 Final Rule, DOE
had received a request from members of the AHAM task force to add to
appendix J3 additional steps to the qualification procedure that have
historically been performed on each new lot of test cloth to ensure
uniformity of RMC test results on test cloths from the beginning,
middle, and end of each new lot. Id. at 87 FR 33368. Industry practice
has been to perform this ``uniformity check'' before conducting the
procedure to develop the RMC correction factors currently specified in
appendix J3. Id. Specifically, the uniformity check involves performing
an RMC measurement on nine bundles of sample test cloth representing
the beginning, middle, and end locations of the first, middle, and last
rolls of test cloth in a new lot. Id. In the historical procedure
provided by the AHAM task force, the coefficient of variation (``CV'')
across the nine RMC values must be less than or equal to 1 percent for
the test cloth lot to be considered acceptable for use. Id. The
amendments codified by the June 2022 Final Rule included the suggested
requirement for the CV of the ``uniformity check'' procedure to be less
than or equal to 1 percent. Id. at 87 FR 33369.
Shortly after the publication of the June 2022 Final Rule
establishing the requirement for the CV to be less than or equal to 1
percent--but prior to its effective date--lot 24D was produced by the
test cloth supplier and was measured to have a CV of 1.6 percent. AHAM
developed correction factors for this lot of test cloth despite its CV
over 1 percent, on the basis that the new CV requirement had not yet
become effective, and that the industry was facing a test cloth
shortage.
Since the effective date of the CV requirement, the AHAM task force
has developed correction factors for test cloth lots 25A and 25B \31\--
both with CV values of 1.1 percent. AHAM stated in letters to DOE that
it based its recommendations to proceed with these test cloth lots on
the ongoing test cloth shortages, DOE's historical acceptance of lots
with CVs exceeding 1 percent, and the extensive testing that DOE
performed of lot 25A, as described in section III.C.3 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\31\ See letters received by DOE on December 13, 2023 and May
24, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOE notes that the 1-percent threshold was originally recommended
by AHAM during a previous test procedure rulemaking. 87 FR 33316, 33368
(Jun. 1, 2022). DOE further notes that prior to the codification of the
pre-qualification procedure, the AHAM task force used its discretion to
evaluate the uniformity of each new test cloth lot. DOE understands the
repeatable performance of test cloth lots with a CV slightly higher
than 1 percent--as shown by the testing of lot 25A described in section
III.C.3 of this document--to be an indication that the 1-percent
threshold may be unnecessarily stringent (i.e., too low). In this NOPR,
DOE proposes to amend appendix J3 by increasing the allowable CV
threshold to 2 percent.
DOE requests comment on its proposal to amend the CV threshold
requirement in appendix J3 from 1 percent to 2 percent. Specifically,
DOE requests comment on whether another threshold would be more
appropriate.
6. Variance P-Value Threshold and Root-Mean-Square Error
In the October 2003 Final Rule, DOE adopted a statistical
procedure, called ``analysis of variance'' (or ``ANOVA''), as the lot-
to-lot interactive-effect statistical test for screening out lots of
test cloth whose RMC behavior is inconsistent with the baseline lot. 68
FR 62198, 62201. The ANOVA statistical test measures the extent of the
deviation of the shape of the RMC compared to the g-curve for a given
lot of the test cloth from the shape of the RMC compared to the g-curve
for the baseline

[[Page 87813]]

lot. Id. In the October 2003 Final Rule, DOE explained that it believed
that the test would catch any unanticipated deviation in RMC in future
lots. Id.
Section 8.8 of appendix J3 specifies performing the analysis of
variance with replication test using two factors, spin speed and lot,
to determine whether the interaction of speed and lot is significant.
If the interaction is not significant (as calculated by the ``P-value''
of the F-statistic being greater than 0.1), then the lot is considered
acceptable. If the P-value is less than 0.1, the test cloth is deemed
unacceptable. The P-value provides an indication of any interactive
effect between lots and spin speeds. The lower the P-value, the
stronger the evidence of such an interaction.
On March 29, 2010, AHAM sent DOE a letter (``March 2010 AHAM
Letter'') noting that the lot 17 was measured to have a P-value that
was less than 0.1. (No. 2 at p. 1) AHAM requested that DOE approve lot
17 for use on the basis that the root-mean-square error (``RMSE'') was
less than 2 percent, the P-value of the test cloth excluding the 100g
test condition was greater than 0.1, and test cloth supply shortage
issues. (Id. at pp. 1-4)
The more recent lot of AATCC test cloth evaluated by DOE and AHAM,
as described in section III.C.4 of this document, had a P-value of
0.072, which would not meet the requirements of section 8.8 of appendix
J3. However, the testing conducted by DOE and AHAM \32\ suggests that,
despite the low P-value, the application of the test cloth correction
factors produces corrected RMC values that are comparable (i.e., less
than 1 RMC percentage point difference on average) to the standard RMC
values for each tested extractor condition. For this reason, DOE has
tentatively determined that a low P-value is not necessarily indicative
of a test cloth lot not being acceptable for use in the clothes washer
test procedures. DOE has further tentatively determined that a
different statistical measure can provide a better measure of the
acceptability of a new test cloth lot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\32\ See the Technical Appendix available at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2024-BT-TP-0009</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Specifically, DOE has evaluated the usefulness of the RMSE between
the corrected RMC values and the standard RMC values for the same test
conditions as a potentially more relevant statistical measure to
evaluate a new test cloth lot. Conceptually, this RMSE value represents
the closeness of fit of the corrected RMC values to the standard RMC
values. A smaller RMSE value indicates a better closeness of fit.
Recognizing that the corrected RMC value is used to calculate IMEF, DOE
tentatively determines that RMSE--which evaluates corrected RMC
values--would provide a better measure of acceptability than P-value,
which evaluates uncorrected RMC values.
As shown in Table III.2, the RMSE values of the historical test
cloth lots posted to DOE's website \33\ fall within a range of 0.004 to
0.014. Additionally, the AATCC lot of test cloth evaluated by DOE and
AHAM, as described in section III.C.4 of this document, has an RMSE of
0.0091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\33\ DOE maintains a historical record of the standard extractor
test data and final correction curve coefficients for each approved
lot of energy test cloth at <a href="http://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/articles/clothes-washer-test-cloth-correction-factor-information">www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/articles/clothes-washer-test-cloth-correction-factor-information</a>.

Table III.2--Historical Test Cloth Lot RMSE Values
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lot RMSE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5....................................................... 0.004
6....................................................... 0.014
7....................................................... 0.007
8....................................................... 0.005
9....................................................... 0.006
10...................................................... 0.007
11...................................................... 0.008
12...................................................... 0.009
13...................................................... 0.009
14...................................................... 0.007
15...................................................... 0.005
16...................................................... 0.009
17...................................................... 0.011
18...................................................... 0.009
19...................................................... 0.010
20...................................................... 0.008
21...................................................... 0.010
22...................................................... 0.010
23...................................................... 0.009
24A..................................................... 0.010
24B..................................................... 0.008
24D..................................................... 0.011
25A..................................................... 0.008
25B..................................................... 0.009
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on the historical record and its testing, in this NOPR, DOE
tentatively determines that an RMSE-based threshold for new test cloth
lots would provide a better measure of the acceptability of a new test
cloth lot. Therefore, DOE is proposing to replace the P-value
evaluation in section 8.8 of appendix J3 with a calculation of RMSE and
a requirement that the RMSE be below 0.015, which represents a
threshold slightly higher than the maximum RMSE value of 0.014 observed
among historical test cloth lots.
DOE requests feedback on its proposal to replace the P-value test
in appendix J3 with a root-mean-square error test.
DOE requests feedback on specifying 0.015 as an acceptability
threshold for the RMSE value.

D. Other Clarifying and Restructuring Edits

1. Introductory Paragraph
Appendix J3 includes test cloth specifications, procedures for pre-
conditioning test cloth, procedures for verifying that new lots of test
cloth meet the defined material specifications, and procedures for
developing RMC correction factors. Appendix J3 contains an introductory
section titled ``Objective'' that summarizes the key objectives of the
procedure. This paragraph currently does not reference the pre-
conditioning of test cloth as one of the key objectives.
In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to update the heading to appendix J3
and its objective paragraph to explicitly include pre-conditioning of
test cloth as one of its objectives.
DOE requests feedback on its proposal to update appendix J3 to
explicitly mention pre-conditioning of test cloth.
2. Pre-Conditioning Instructions
Section 5 of appendix J3 provides the test cloth pre-conditioning
instructions. Currently, this section is organized as a single
paragraph detailing the entire procedure, whereas other sections of
appendix J3 are organized with sections that provide a clearer step-by-
step sequence of instructions. DOE proposes to restructure section 5 of
appendix J3 to read as a sequence of instructions rather than a single
paragraph, for greater clarity and ease of use.
3. Harmonizing Clothes Washer and Clothes Dryer Test Procedures
As previously discussed, in the August 2015 Final Rule, DOE moved
the test cloth qualification procedures from appendix J2 to a newly
created appendix J3. Appendix J3 is currently only referenced by the
clothes washer test procedure. Section 2.7 of appendices J and J2
reference appendix J3 generally for test cloth specifications and
section 5 of appendix J3 for test cloth pre-conditioning instructions.
Whereas, for clothes dryers, section 2.6 of appendices D1 and D2 list
each of the test cloth specifications and detail the test cloth pre-
conditioning requirements.
Historically, manufacturers and test laboratories have used the
same test cloth for both clothes washers and clothes dryers. The May
2024 AHAM Letter requested that DOE harmonize specifically the pre-
conditioning procedure for clothes washers and

[[Page 87814]]

clothes dryers. (No. 1 at p. 4) In line with this recommendation, DOE
has tentatively determined that all aspects of the test cloth
specifications can be harmonized between clothes washers and clothes
dryers (i.e., not just the pre-conditioning requirements).
DOE proposes to harmonize test cloth specifications between
appendices J, J2, D1, and D2 by replacing existing test cloth
specifications in appendices D1 and D2 with references to the analogous
specifications in appendix J3.
Specifically, DOE is proposing to replace the entirety of section
2.6 in both appendices D1 and D2 with a paragraph specifically
referencing sections 3 (Test Cloth Specifications) and 7 (Test Cloth
Material Verification Procedure) of appendix J3. DOE is also proposing
to update section 2.7 of appendices J and J2 to specifically reference
sections 3 (Test Cloth Specifications), 7 (Test Cloth Material
Verification Procedure), and 8 (RMC Correction Curve Procedure) of
appendix J3.
DOE is further proposing to remove section 3.8 of appendix J3,
which currently specifies that the test cloth must be clean, may not be
used for more than 60 clothes washer runs, must be permanently marked,
and may not be used in mixed lots. These specifications--which are
specific to clothes washers and do not apply to clothes dryers--would
instead be included in section 2.7 of appendices J and J2. Appendices
D1 and D2 would retain the existing requirement that for clothes dryers
the test cloth must not be used for more than 25 runs, although this
requirement would be relocated to section 2.6 (from 2.6.1(c)
currently).
Finally, DOE is proposing to update the objective statement and
section 5 of appendix J3 to explicitly reference clothes dryers
alongside clothes washers.
DOE requests feedback on its proposal to harmonize test cloth
specifications for clothes washers and clothes dryers.
4. Restructuring Appendix J3
Section 3.2 of appendix J3 specifies the ``nominal fabric type''
for the test cloth as pure finished bleached cloth made with a momie or
granite weave, which is nominally 50 percent cotton and 50 percent
polyester. Section 3.5 of appendix J3 contains a duplicative (although
more specific) requirement specifying a fiber content of 50 percent
<plus-minus> 4 percent cotton, with the balance being polyester. DOE
proposes to remove the less specific nominal fiber content
specification from section 3.2 of appendix J3. Accordingly, DOE is
further proposing to update the name of section 3.2 of appendix J3 from
``nominal fabric type'' to ``fabric type.''
Within section 3 of appendix J3, which lists the specifications for
the test cloth, sections 3.2 through 3.5 are currently organized as
follows: section 3.2 specifies the nominal fabric type, section 3.3
specifies the fabric weight, section 3.4 specifies the thread count,
and section 3.5 specifies the fiber content of the yarn. This order
does not match the order in which these material properties are
considered throughout the test cloth fabrication process. Specifically,
the weaving process starts with spinning yarn of a specific fiber
content, then a specific number of yarn strands (corresponding to
thread count) are woven into a roll of fabric, resulting in a specific
material density (i.e., fabric weight). To better match the order in
which these material properties are considered throughout the test
cloth fabrication process, DOE proposes to reorder these sections to
provide the fiber content specification first, followed by thread count
specification, followed by the fabric weight specification.
Section 3.7 of appendix J3 currently includes dimensions for the
energy test cloth and energy stuffer cloth \34\ and specifies that the
dimensions apply ``before washing.'' DOE is aware that this terminology
may lead to confusion, as it is inconsistent with other parts of the
test procedure that use the term ``pre-conditioning'' rather than
``washing'' to refer to the process by which test cloth is washed
before its first use. Consistent with the recommendations in the May
2024 AHAM Letter, DOE is proposing to clarify this wording and to
specify that the dimensions listed in section 3.7 apply before pre-
conditioning of the test cloth. (No. 1 at p. 24)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\34\ An energy stuffer cloth is made from the same material as
an energy test cloth but is cut to a smaller size. Test loads must
consist of energy test cloths and no more than five energy stuffer
cloths per load to achieve the specified weight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendices D1, D2, J, J2, and J3 currently use inconsistent
hyphenation of the word pre-conditioning, using ``pre-conditioning'' in
some cases and ``preconditioning'' in others. The May 2024 AHAM Letter
requested that DOE standardize the hyphenation of ``pre-conditioning''
throughout the appendix. (No. 1 at p. 4) In this NOPR, DOE is proposing
to standardize the hyphenation of ``pre-conditioning'' across all five
appendices.
The June 2022 Final Rule re-numbered certain sections of appendix
J3 and implemented in section 8.5 of appendix J3 references to
``sections 8.3.3 and 8.3.4 of this appendix.'' 87 FR 33316, 33405.
These cross-references should instead reference sections 8.3 and 8.4 of
appendix J3. DOE is therefore proposing to correct this typographical
error by updating section 8.5 of appendix J3 to correctly reference
sections 8.3 and 8.4, in place of sections 8.3.3 and 8.3.4.
Finally, DOE is proposing to add a section 0 to appendix J3 to
specify the industry standards incorporated by reference in this test
procedure. Specifically, these include AATCC Test Method 118-2007,
AATCC Test Method 79-2010, AATCC Test Method 135-2010, and, newly,
AATCC LP1-2021. DOE also proposes conforming edits at each instance
where these test methods are referenced within appendix J3.
DOE requests feedback on its proposals to clarify and restructure
appendix J3, including the addition of a new section to specify the
industry standards incorporated by reference.

E. Test Procedure Costs and Impact

EPCA requires that test procedures proposed by DOE not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3); 6314(a)(2)) DOE does not
anticipate that the amendments proposed in this NOPR would impact
testing costs or the burden of conducting the test procedure.
DOE's market research indicates that the alternate test cloth
proposed for use in this document has approximately the same cost per
pound as the current test cloth--approximately $40-50 per pound of
unconditioned test cloth.\35\ Therefore, using the alternate proposed
test cloth would not impact clothes washer or clothes dryer testing
costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\35\ These cost estimates are based on DOE's most recent
purchases of test cloth in relatively small quantities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on an analysis of the test results presented in the Technical
Appendix, DOE has tentatively determined that manufacturers would be
able to rely on data generated under the current test procedures should
any of these additional proposed amendments be finalized.
DOE requests comments on its tentative determination that that the
amendments proposed in this NOPR would not impact testing costs or the
burden of conducting the test procedure.

F. Compliance Date

As discussed, on September 28, 2023, DOE issued a statement stating
that DOE would exercise its enforcement discretion and not impose civil
penalties on a clothes washer, commercial clothes washer, or clothes

[[Page 87815]]

dryer manufacturer for certifying compliance with DOE's energy
conservation standards based on testing that exceeds the maximum test
cloth run provision set forth in the DOE test procedures. Instead, DOE
allowed for usage of test cloth for twice the number of runs allowed in
the relevant test procedures.
In the May 2024 AHAM Letter, AHAM requested that DOE maintain its
enforcement discretion policy to allow twice the number of test runs
than is currently specified for test cloth meeting the current
specifications, but not for any of the alternate test cloth proposed
for use in this NOPR, noting that it does not have any test data to
support an extended number of cycles on the new test cloth at this
time. (No. 1 at p. 4)
EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all
representations of energy efficiency and energy use, including those
made on marketing materials and product labels, must be made in
accordance with that amended test procedure, beginning 180 days after
publication of such a test procedure final rule in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2))
If DOE were to publish an amended test procedure EPCA provides an
allowance for individual manufacturers to petition DOE for an extension
of the 180-day period if the manufacturer may experience undue hardship
in meeting the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) To receive such an
extension, petitions must be filed with DOE no later than 60 days
before the end of the 180-day period and must detail how the
manufacturer will experience undue hardship. (Id.)
DOE has tentatively determined that the updated test cloth
provisions as proposed in this NOPR would alleviate any test cloth
shortages that were the impetus for the enforcement discretion policy,
and that at the time of compliance of any amended test procedure,
should DOE decide to issue such an amendment, no need for such a policy
would remain. Therefore, DOE has tentatively determined that upon the
compliance date of test procedure provisions of an amended test
procedure (i.e., 180 days after publication of a test procedure final
rule), should DOE issue such an amendment, the enforcement discretion
policy would be withdrawn.
DOE requests comments on its tentative determination that the
enforcement discretion policy allowing twice the number of test cloth
runs would be withdrawn 180 days after publication of a test procedure
final rule.
In the May 2024 AHAM Letter, AHAM further requested that DOE
consider allowing immediate use of the alternate test cloth as a relief
to manufacturers facing test cloth shortages, rather than waiting for
the completion of the rulemaking. (No. 1 at p. 5)
DOE recognizes the concern of test cloth availability. As noted,
DOE would maintain the current enforcement policy allowing for the
extended lifetime of the current test cloth until 180 days after
publication of a test procedure final rule. The proposed amendments, if
adopted, could be used as early as their effective date (i.e., 30 days
after publication of any final rule DOE may publish regarding these
amendments).

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review,'' as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and E.O.
14094, ``Modernizing Regulatory Review,'' 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023),
requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to (1) propose or
adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits
justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are
difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the least
burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives,
taking into account, among other things, and to the extent practicable,
the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net
benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) to the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than
specifying the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities
must adopt; and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to
direct regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage
the desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or
providing information upon which choices can be made by the public. DOE
emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its guidance, the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (``OIRA'') in the Office
of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has emphasized that such techniques
may include identifying changing future compliance costs that might
result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, this proposed regulatory action
is consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to OIRA for review. OIRA has
determined that this proposed regulatory action does not constitute a
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
Accordingly, this action was not submitted to OIRA for review under
E.O. 12866.

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (``IRFA'')
for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless
the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE
published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that
the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly
considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General
Counsel's website: <a href="http://www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel">www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel</a>. DOE
reviewed this proposed rule under the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on February
19, 2003.
DOE has recently conducted a focused inquiry into small business
manufacturers of the RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers covered by
this proposed rulemaking. DOE used available public information to
identify potential small manufacturers. DOE accessed the Compliance
Certification Database \36\ to create a list of companies that import
or otherwise manufacture the RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers
covered by this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\36\ U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification
Database, available at: <a href="http://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/products.html">www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/products.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As detailed in section III.C.4 of this document, DOE is proposing
that an additional type of test cloth be permitted for testing. This
alternate test

[[Page 87816]]

cloth is approximately the same cost as the existing test cloth. As a
result, DOE does not expect any increased cost or burdens to
manufacturers from this proposal.
Therefore, DOE initially concludes that the impacts of the proposed
test procedure amendments proposed in this NOPR would not have a
``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities,'' and that the preparation of an IRFA is not warranted. DOE
will transmit the certification and supporting statement of factual
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

Manufacturers of RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers must
certify to DOE that their products comply with any applicable energy
conservation standards. To certify compliance, manufacturers must first
obtain test data for their products according to the DOE test
procedures, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures.
DOE has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping
requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial
equipment, including RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers. (See
generally 10 CFR part 429.) The collection-of-information requirement
for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and
approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA''). This
requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910-
1400. Public reporting burden for the certification is estimated to
average 35 hours per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
DOE is not proposing to amend the certification or reporting
requirements for RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers in this NOPR.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.

D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

In this NOPR, DOE proposes amendments to test procedures that are
used to demonstrate compliance with energy conservation standards for
RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes dryers. DOE has determined that this
rulemaking falls into a class of actions that are categorically
excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10
CFR part 1021. Specifically, DOE has determined that adopting test
procedures for measuring energy efficiency of consumer products and
industrial equipment is consistent with activities identified in 10 CFR
part 1021, appendix A to subpart D, A5 and A6. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999)
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism
implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has
determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
products that are the subject of this proposed rule. States can
petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further
action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation, (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation, (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction,
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately defines
key terms, and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``UMRA'')
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may
cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one
year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under

[[Page 87817]]

UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at <a href="http://www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel">www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel</a>. DOE examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and its
statement of policy and determined that the rulemaking contains neither
an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in the
expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so these requirements
do not apply.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999

Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any proposed rule or policy that may affect
family well-being. When developing a Family Policymaking Assessment,
agencies must assess whether: (1) the action strengthens or erodes the
stability or safety of the family and, particularly, the marital
commitment; (2) the action strengthens or erodes the authority and
rights of parents in the education, nurture, and supervision of their
children; (3) the action helps the family perform its functions, or
substitutes governmental activity for the function; (4) the action
increases or decreases disposable income or poverty of families and
children; (5) the proposed benefits of the action justify the financial
impact on the family; (6) the action may be carried out by State or
local government or by the family; and whether (7) the action
establishes an implicit or explicit policy concerning the relationship
between the behavior and personal responsibility of youth, and the
norms of society. In evaluating the above factors, DOE has concluded
that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment as
none of the above factors are implicated. Further, this proposed
determination would not have any financial impact on families nor any
impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation
would not result in any takings that might require compensation under
the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001

Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant
to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, Improving Implementation of the Information
Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE published updated guidelines which
are available at <a href="http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf">www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf</a>. DOE has
reviewed this proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an
agency that promulgates or is expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that: (1) is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order, and is likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy; or (2) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
The proposed regulatory action to amend the test procedures for
measuring the energy efficiency of RCWs, CCWs, and consumer clothes
dryers is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as a
significant energy action by the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it
is not a significant energy action, and, accordingly, DOE has not
prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974

Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788;
``FEAA'') Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where
a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the
notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and
background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE
to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal
Trade Commission (``FTC'') concerning the impact of the commercial or
industry standards on competition.
The proposed modifications to the test procedures for RCWs, CCWs,
and consumer clothes dryers would incorporate fabric specifications
from the following commercial standard: AATCC LP1-2021. DOE has
evaluated this standard and is unable to conclude whether it fully
complies with the requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA (i.e.,
whether it was developed in a manner that fully provides for public
participation, comment, and review). DOE will consult with both the
Attorney General and the Chairman of the FTC concerning the impact of
these test procedures on competition, prior to prescribing a final
rule.

M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

The test procedure proposed in this NOPR references AATCC LP1-2021,
``Laboratory Procedure for Home Laundering: Machine Washing.'' AATCC
LP1-2021 is an industry-developed test standard that specifies standard
home laundering conditions. Specifically, the test procedure proposed
in this NOPR references AATCC LP1-2021 for specifying standardized
fabric materials. AATCC LP1-2021 is reasonably available from AATCC
(See, <a href="http://members.aatcc.org/store/lp001/2212/">members.aatcc.org/store/lp001/2212/</a>).

V. Public Participation

A. Submission of Comments

DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
proposed rule no later than the date provided in the DATES section at
the beginning of this proposed rule.\37\ Interested parties

[[Page 87818]]

may submit comments, data, and other information using any of the
methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this
document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\37\ DOE has historically provided a 75-day comment period for
test procedure NOPRs pursuant to the North American Free Trade
Agreement, U.S.-Canada-Mexico (``NAFTA''), Dec. 17, 1992, 32 I.L.M.
289 (1993); the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation
Act, Public Law 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057 (1993) (codified as amended
at 10 U.S.C.A. Sec. 2576) (1993) (``NAFTA Implementation Act'');
and Executive Order 12889, ``Implementation of the North American
Free Trade Agreement,'' 58 FR 69681 (Dec. 30, 1993). However, on
July 1, 2020, the Agreement between the United States of America,
the United Mexican States, and the United Canadian States
(``USMCA''), Nov. 30, 2018, 134 Stat. 11 (i.e., the successor to
NAFTA), went into effect, and Congress's action in replacing NAFTA
through the USMCA Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. 4501 et seq. (2020),
implies the repeal of E.O. 12889 and its 75-day comment period
requirement for technical regulations. Thus, the controlling laws
are EPCA and the USMCA Implementation Act. Consistent with EPCA's
public comment period requirements for consumer products, the USMCA
only requires a minimum comment period of 60 days. Consequently, DOE
now provides a 60-day public comment period for test procedure
NOPRs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitting comments via <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. The
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties,
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to
your comment. Otherwise, persons viewing comments will see only first
and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments,
and any documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'')). Comments submitted
through <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received
through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information
submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential
Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> before
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail also will be posted to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. If
you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly
viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying
documents. Instead, provide your contact information in a cover letter.
Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and
optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly
viewable as long as it does not include any comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if
feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies.
No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English, and that are free of any defects
or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form
of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic
signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email two well-marked copies: one copy of the document marked
``confidential'' including all the information believed to be
confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-confidential''
with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make
its own determination about the confidential status of the information
and treat it according to its determination.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment

Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of
interested parties concerning the following issues:
(1) DOE requests comment on the roll dimensions and cut
orientations that are currently used to fabricate DOE test cloth.
(2) DOE requests comment as to whether, or to what extent, the
energy test cloth cut orientation could impact the RMC measurement in
the clothes washer test procedure.
(3) DOE requests comment on its concern that establishing a cut
orientation requirement could lead to fabric waste, depending on the
dimensions of the fabric roll.
(4) DOE requests comment on its tentative determination not to
specify a cut orientation requirement. DOE further seeks comment on
whether it should adopt the cut orientation requirement specified by
AHAM or any other cut orientation requirement.
(5) DOE requests comment on its tentative determination that
section 3.1 of appendix J3 is superfluous and its proposal to remove
the requirements in section 3.1 of appendix J3.
(6) DOE requests feedback on its proposal to specify in appendix J3
that fabric weight and thread count specifications apply to finished
goods prior to pre-conditioning.
(7) DOE requests feedback on its proposal to add the term ``crepe''
to the list of allowable weaves in appendix J3.
(8) DOE requests feedback on its tentative determination not to
establish definitions for ``crepe,'' ``granite,'' or ``momie'' weave in
appendix J3.
(9) DOE requests comment on its proposal to allow the use of
Laundering Ballast Type 3 cloth specified in AATCC LP1-2021 (with
certain additional specifications) as an alternate test cloth for
conducting clothes washer and clothes dryer testing.
(10) DOE requests feedback on its tentative determination not to
establish

[[Page 87819]]

a definition for ``plain weave'' in appendix J3.
(11) DOE requests comment on its proposal to amend the CV threshold
requirement in appendix J3 from 1 percent to 2 percent. Specifically,
DOE requests comment on whether another threshold would be more
appropriate.
(12) DOE requests feedback on its proposal to replace the P-value
test in appendix J3 with a root-mean-square error test.
(13) DOE requests feedback on specifying 0.015 as an acceptability
threshold for the RMSE value.
(14) DOE requests feedback on its proposal to update appendix J3 to
explicitly mention pre-conditioning of test cloth.
(15) DOE requests feedback on its proposal to harmonize test cloth
specifications for clothes washers and clothes dryers.
(16) DOE requests feedback on its proposals to clarify and
restructure appendix J3, including the addition of a new section to
specify the industry standards incorporated by reference.
(17) DOE requests comments on its tentative determination that that
the amendments proposed in this NOPR would not impact testing costs or
the burden of conducting the test procedure.
(18) DOE requests comments on its tentative determination that the
enforcement discretion policy allowing twice the number of test cloth
runs would be withdrawn 180 days after publication of a test procedure
final rule.
Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the
conduct of this rulemaking that may not specifically be identified in
this document.

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of
proposed rulemaking and request for comment.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430

Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.

Signing Authority

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on October 25,
2024, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.

Signed in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy;

For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
part 430 of chapter II of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set
forth below:

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

0
2. Amend Sec. 430.3 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) as paragraphs (d)(2)
through (4); and
0
b. Adding new paragraph (d)(1).
The addition reads as follows:

Sec. 430.3 Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) AATCC LP1-2021, Laboratory Procedure for Home Laundering:
Machine Washing, Revised 2023, IBR approved for Appendix J3 to Subpart
B.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend appendix D1 to subpart B by:
0
a. Revising sections 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, and 2.6.3;
0
b. Adding sections 2.6.4 and 2.6.5; and
0
c. Revising the heading to section 2.8.
The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix D1 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers

* * * * *
2. * * *
2.6 Test cloths.
2.6.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
2.6.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to
this subpart.
2.6.3 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material.
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes dryer.
2.6.4 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this
subpart.
2.6.5 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for
more than 25 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *
2.8 Clothes dryer pre-conditioning.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend appendix D2 to subpart B by:
0
a. Revising sections 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, and 2.6.3;
0
b. Adding sections 2.6.4 and 2.6.5; and
0
c. Revising the heading for section 2.8.
The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix D2 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers

* * * * *
2. * * *
2.6 Test cloths.
2.6.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
2.6.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to
this subpart.
2.6.3 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material.
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes dryer.
2.6.4 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this
subpart.
2.6.5 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for
more than 25 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *
2.8 Clothes dryer pre-conditioning.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend appendix J to subpart B by revising section 2.7 to read as
follows:

Appendix J to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Automatic and Semi-Automatic Clothes Washers

* * * * *
2. * * *
2.7 Test cloths.

[[Page 87820]]

2.7.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
2.7.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to
this subpart.
2.7.3 RMC Correction Curve. The test cloth lot used for testing
must have a remaining moisture content (RMC) correction curve
determined, according to section 8 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
2.7.4 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material.
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes
washer.
2.7.5 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this
subpart.
2.7.6 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for
more than 60 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *
0
6. Amend appendix J2 to subpart B by revising section 2.7 to read as
follows:

Appendix J2 to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Automatic and Semi-Automatic Clothes Washers

* * * * *
2. * * *
2.7 Test cloths.
2.7.1 Material Specifications. The energy test cloth and energy
stuffer cloth material and dimensions must conform to the
specifications in section 3 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
2.7.2 Material Verification. The test cloth lot used to
fabricate each piece of test cloth must conform with the material
verification procedures specified in section 7 of appendix J3 to
this subpart.
2.7.3 RMC Correction Curve. The test cloth lot used for testing
must have a remaining moisture content (RMC) correction curve
determined, according to section 8 of appendix J3 to this subpart.
2.7.4 Lot Identification. Each piece of test cloth must be clean
and permanently marked identifying the lot number of the material.
Mixed lots of material must not be used for testing a clothes
washer.
2.7.5 Pre-Conditioning. The test cloth must be pre-conditioned
prior to first use as specified in section 5 of appendix J3 to this
subpart.
2.7.6 Lifetime. Each piece of test cloth must not be used for
more than 60 test runs (after pre-conditioning).
* * * * *
0
7. Amend appendix J3 to subpart B by:
0
a. Revising the heading for appendix J3;
0
b. Adding section 0;
0
c. Revising section 1;
0
d. Revising the heading to section 3;
0
e. Revising sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3;
0
f. Removing sections 3.4 through 3.8;
0
g. Revising section 5;
0
h. Revising sections 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.3, and 7.2.5;
0
i. Revising sections 8.5 through 8.8; and
0
j. Adding section 8.9.
The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix J3 to Subpart B of Part 430--Test Cloth Specifications and
Procedures for Pre-Conditioning and Determining Correction Coefficients
of New Test Cloth Lots

* * * * *
0. Incorporation by Reference.
In Sec. 430.3, DOE incorporated by reference the entire
standard for AATCC Test Method 118-2007, AATCC Test Method 79-2010,
AATCC Test Method 135-2010, and AATCC LP1-2021; however, only
enumerated provisions of AATCC LP1-2021 are applicable as follows:
0.1 AATCC LP1-2021
(a) Table VII as referenced in section 3.1.2 of this appendix.
0.2 [Reserved]
1. Objective
This appendix includes the following:
1.1 Specifications for the test cloth to be used for testing
clothes washers and clothes dryers;
1.2 Procedures for pre-conditioning the test cloth for use in
testing clothes washers and clothes dryers;
1.3 Procedures for verifying that new lots of test cloth meet
the defined material specifications; and
1.4 Procedures for developing a set of correction coefficients
that correlate the measured remaining moisture content (RMC) values
of each new test cloth lot with a set of standard RMC values
established as an historical reference point. These correction
coefficients are applied to the RMC measurements performed during
testing according to appendix J or J2 to this subpart, ensuring that
the final corrected RMC measurement for a clothes washer remains
independent of the test cloth lot used for testing.
* * * * *
3. Test Cloth Specifications
* * * * *
3.1 The test cloth material must be one of the following two
types:
3.1.1 Test cloth meeting all of the specifications in sections
3.1.1.1 through 3.1.1.4 of this appendix.
3.1.1.1 Fabric type. Pure finished bleached cloth made with a
momie, granite, or crepe weave.
3.1.1.2 Fiber content of warp and filling yarn. 50 percent
<plus-minus>4 percent cotton, with the balance being polyester, open
end spun, 15/1 <plus-minus>5 percent cotton count blended yarn.
3.1.1.3 Thread count. Thread count is measured on the finished
good, prior to pre-conditioning. 65 x 57 per inch (warp x fill),
<plus-minus>2 percent.
3.1.1.4 Fabric weight. Fabric weight is measured on the finished
good, prior to pre-conditioning. 5.60 <plus-minus> 0.25 ounces per
square yard (190.0 <plus-minus> 8.4 g/m\2\).
3.1.2 Test cloth meeting the specifications of Laundering
Ballast Type 3, as specified in Table VII of AATCC LP1-2021, with
the following additional specifications and substitutions:
3.1.2.1 Greige fabric yarns. Type 16/1 only.
3.1.2.2 Edges. All edges hemmed only.
3.1.2.3 Finished piece size. Dimensions in accordance with
sections 3.7.1 and 3.7.2 of this appendix for energy test cloths and
energy stuffer cloths, respectively.
3.1.2.4. Finished piece weight. Disregard.
3.2 Water repellent finishes, such as fluoropolymer stain
resistant finishes, must not be applied to the test cloth.
3.3. Test cloth dimensions.
3.3.1 Energy test cloth. The energy test cloth must be made from
test cloth material that is cut to 24 <plus-minus> \1/2\ inches by
36 <plus-minus> \1/2\ inches (61.0 <plus-minus> 1.3 cm by 91.4
<plus-minus> 1.3 cm), and hemmed to 22 <plus-minus> \1/2\ inches by
34 <plus-minus> \1/2\ inches (55.9 <plus-minus> 1.3 cm by 86.4
<plus-minus> 1.3 cm) before pre-conditioning.
3.3.2 Energy stuffer cloth. The energy stuffer cloth must be
made from the same test cloth material as the energy test cloth, cut
to 12 <plus-minus> \1/4\ inches by 12 <plus-minus> \1/4\ inches
(30.5 <plus-minus> 0.6 cm by 30.5 <plus-minus> 0.6 cm), and hemmed
to 10 <plus-minus> \1/4\ inches by 10 <plus-minus> \1/4\ inches
(25.4 <plus-minus> 0.6 cm by 25.4 <plus-minus> 0.6 cm) before pre-
conditioning.
* * * * *
5. Test Cloth Pre-Conditioning Instructions
Use the following instructions for performing pre-conditioning
of new energy test cloths and energy stuffer cloths as specified
throughout section 7 and section 8 of this appendix, before any
clothes washer testing using appendix J or appendix J2 to this
subpart, and before any clothes dryer testing using appendix D1 or
D2 to this subpart.
5.1 Perform five complete wash-rinse-spin cycles, the first two
with current AHAM Standard detergent Formula 3 and the last three
without detergent. Place the test cloth in a clothes washer set at
the maximum water level. Wash the load for ten minutes in soft water
(17 ppm hardness or less) using 27.0 grams + 4.0 grams per pound of
cloth load of AHAM Standard detergent Formula 3. The wash
temperature is to be controlled to 135 [deg]F <plus-minus> 5 [deg]F
(57.2 [deg]C <plus-minus> 2.8 [deg]C) and the rinse temperature is
to be controlled to 60 [deg]F <plus-minus> 5 [deg]F (15.6 [deg]C
<plus-minus> 2.8 [deg]C).
5.2 Dry the load to bone-dry between each of the five wash-
rinse-spin cycles.
5.3 The maximum shrinkage after pre-conditioning must not be
more than 5 percent of the length and width. Measure per AATCC Test
Method 135-2010.
* * * * *
7. * * *
7.1 * * *
7.1.1 Dimensions. Each hemmed energy test cloth must meet the
size specifications in section 3.3.1 of this appendix. Each hemmed
energy stuffer cloth must meet the size specifications in section
3.3.2 of this appendix.
7.1.2 Oil repellency. Perform AATCC Test Method 118-2007, to
confirm the absence of Scotchguard\TM\ or other water-repellent
finish. An Oil Repellency Grade of 0 (Fails Kaydol) is required.

[[Page 87821]]

7.1.3 Absorbency. Perform AATCC Test Method 79-2010, to confirm
the absence of Scotchguard\TM\ or other water-repellent finish. The
time to absorb one drop must be on the order of 1 second.
7.2 * * *
7.2.5 Calculate the coefficient of variation (CV) of the nine
average RMC values from each sample load. The CV must be less than
or equal to 2.0% for the test cloth lot to be considered acceptable
and to perform the standard extractor RMC testing.
8. * * *
8.5 Repeat sections 8.3 and 8.4 of this appendix an additional
two times, so that three replications at each extractor condition
are performed. When this procedure is performed in its entirety, a
total of 60 extractor RMC test runs are required.
8.6 Calculate RMC<INF>cloth-avg</INF> for each extractor test
condition by averaging the values of the 3 replications performed
specified in sections 8.3 and 8.4 of this appendix.
8.7 Perform a linear least-squares fit to determine coefficients
A and B such that the standard RMC values shown in table 8.7 of this
appendix (RMC<INF>standard</INF>) are linearly related to the
RMC<INF>cloth-avg</INF> values calculated in section 8.6 of this
appendix:

RMC<INF>standard</INF> ~ A x RMC<INF>cloth-avg</INF> + B

where A and B are coefficients of the linear least-squares fit.

Table 8.7--Standard RMC Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RMC percentage
---------------------------------------------------------------
Warm soak Cold soak
``g Force'' ---------------------------------------------------------------
15 min. spin 4 min. spin 15 min. spin 4 min. spin
(percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100............................................. 45.9 49.9 49.7 52.8
200............................................. 35.7 40.4 37.9 43.1
350............................................. 29.6 33.1 30.7 35.8
500............................................. 24.2 28.7 25.5 30.0
650............................................. 23.0 26.4 24.1 28.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8.8 Calculate the corrected RMC value for each extractor test
condition, RMC<INF>cloth-corr</INF> as follows:

RMC<INF>cloth-corr</INF> = A x RMC<INF>cloth-avg</INF> + B

Where:

RMC<INF>cloth-avg</INF> = the average RMC value, as calculated in
section 8.6 of this appendix for each extractor test condition,
expressed as a decimal, and
A and B are the coefficients of the linear least squares fit as
determined in section 8.7 of this appendix.
8.9 Calculate the root mean square error of the linear fit,
RMSE. The RMSE must be less than or equal to 0.015 for the test
cloth lot to be considered acceptable. The RMSE is calculated as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP05NO24.001

Where:

RMC<INF>standard_i</INF> = the RMC<INF>standard</INF> value in table
8.7 of this appendix for the ith extractor test condition, expressed
as a decimal,
RMC<INF>cloth-corr_i</INF> = the corrected RMC value, as calculated
in section 8.8 of this appendix for the ith extractor test
condition, expressed as a decimal, and
i = the 20 extractor test conditions listed in table 8.7 of this
appendix.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-25480 Filed 11-4-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on November 5, 2024.

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.