# Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2017-15464

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Rule
- **Published:** August 7, 2017
- **Citation:** 82 FR 36858

## Text

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE-2016-BT-TP-0002]
RIN 1904-AD66
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

On September 20, 2016, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to establish a new metric, as well as new definitions, test procedures, certification requirements, enforcement testing procedures, and labeling provisions for dedicated-purpose pool pumps (DPPPs). That proposed rulemaking serves as the basis for the final rule. Specifically, DOE is adopting a test procedure for measuring the weighted energy factor (WEF) for certain varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps. This final rule incorporates by reference certain sections of the industry test standard Hydraulic Institute (HI) 40.6-2014, “Methods for Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing” as the basis of the adopted test procedure. The definitions, test procedures, certification requirements, enforcement testing procedures, and labeling provisions are based on the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, which was established under the Appliance Standards Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (ASRAC).

DATES:

The effective date of this rule is September 6, 2017. Compliance with the final rule will be mandatory for representations of WEF and other metrics addressed by the adopted test procedure made on or after February 5, 2018. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on September 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

The docket, which includes
Federal Register
notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at
www.regulations.gov
. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov
index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.

A link to the docket Web page can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2016-BT-TP-0002
. The docket Web page will contain simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.

For further information on how to review the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Ashley Armstrong, 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) 586-6590. Email:
Ashley.Armstrong@ee.doe.gov
.

Ms. Mary Greene, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1817. Email:
Mary.Greene@hq.doe.gov
.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This final rule incorporates by reference into 10 CFR parts 429 and 431 the following industry standards:

(1) Hydraulic Institute (HI) 40.6-2014, (“HI 40.6-2014-B”) “Methods for Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing,” except for section 40.6.4.1, “Vertically suspended pumps”; section 40.6.4.2, “Submersible pumps”; section 40.6.5.3, “Test report”; section 40.6.5.5, “Test conditions”; section 40.6.5.5.2, “Speed of rotation during testing”; and section 40.6.6.1, “Translation of test results to rated speed of rotation”; and Appendix A, Testing arrangements (normative): A.7, “Testing at temperatures exceeding 30 °C (86 °F)”; and Appendix B, “Reporting of test results (normative)”), copyright 2014.

Copies of HI 40.6-2014 can be obtained from: The Hydraulic Institute at 6 Campus Drive, First Floor North, Parsippany, NJ 07054-4406, (973) 267-9700, or by visiting
www.pumps.org
.

(2) Canadian Standards Association (CSA) C747-2009 (Reaffirmed 2014), “Energy Efficiency Test Methods for Small Motors,” CSA reaffirmed 2014, section 1, “Scope”; section 3, “Definitions”; section 5, “General Test Requirements”; and section 6, “Test Method.”

Copies of CSA C747-2009 (RA 2014) can be obtained from: 5060 Spectrum Way, Suite 100, Mississauga, Ontario, L4W 5N6, Canada, (800) 463-6727, or by visiting
www.csagroup.org
.

(3) IEEE Std 113-1985, “IEEE Guide: Test Procedures for Direct-Current Machines,” copyright 1985, section 3.1, “Instrument Selection Factors”; section 3.4 “Power Measurement”: section 3.5 “Power Sources”; section 4.1.2 “Ambient Air”; section 4.1.4 “Direction of Rotation”; section 5.4.1 “Reference Conditions”; and section 5.4.3.2 “Dynomometer or Torquemeter Method.”

(4) IEEE Std 114-2010, “IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Single-Phase Induction Motors,” approved September 30, 2010, section 3.2, “Tests with load”; section 4 “Testing facilities”; section 5.2 “Mechanical measurements”; section 5.3 “Temperature measurements”; and section 6 “Tests.”

Copies of IEEE 113-1985 and IEEE 114-2010 and can be obtained from: IEEE, 45 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331, (732) 981-0060, or by visiting
www.ieee.org
.

(5) NSF International (NSF)/American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard 50-2015, (“NSF/ANSI 50-2015”), “Equipment for Swimming Pools, Spas, Hot Tubs and Other Recreational Water Facilities,” Annex C, “(normative) Test methods for the evaluation of centrifugal pumps,” section C.3, “Self-priming capability,” ANSI approved January 26, 2015.

Copies of NSF/ANSI 50-2015 can be obtained from: NSF International, 789 N. Dixboro Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, (743) 769-8010, or by visiting
www.nsf.org
.

(6) UL 1081, (“ANSI/UL 1081-2016”), “Standard for Swimming Pool Pumps, Filters, and Chlorinators,” 7th Edition, ANSI approved October 21, 2016.

Copies of ANSI/UL 1081-2016 can be obtained from: UL, 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062, (847) 272-8800, or by visiting
http://ul.com
.

See section IV.N for additional information on these standards.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background

A. Authority

B. Background

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule

III. Discussion

A. General Comments

B. Definitions

1. Existing Pump Definitions

2. Definition of Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump

3. Pool Filter Pumps

4. Other Varieties of Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

5. Storable and Rigid Electric Spa Pumps

6. Applicability of Test Procedure Based on Pump Configuration

7. Definitions Related to Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Speed Configurations and Controls

8. Basic Model

C. Rating Metric

D. Test Methods for Different DPPP Categories and Configurations

1. Self-Priming and Non-Self-Priming Pool Filter Pumps

2. Waterfall Pumps

3. Pressure Cleaner Booster Pumps

4. Summary

E. Determination of Pump Performance

1. Incorporation by Reference of HI 40.6-2014

2. Exceptions, Modifications and Additions to HI 40.6-2014

F. Representations of Test Metrics

1. Representations of Primary Efficiency Metrics

2. Definition of Representation

3. Impact on Voluntary and Other Regulatory Programs

4. Request for Extension

G. Additional Test Methods

1. Determination of DPPP Capacity

2. Determination of Self-Priming Capability

3. Determination of Maximum Head

H. Energy Factor Test Method

I. Labeling Requirements

J. Replacement DPPP Motors

K. Certification and Enforcement Provisions for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

1. Sampling Plan

2. Certification Requirements

3. Enforcement Provisions

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

1. Review of DPPP Manufacturers

2. Burden of Conducting the DOE DPPP Test Procedure

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. Congressional Notification

N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

Pumps are included in the list of “covered equipment” for which the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards (ECSs) and test procedures (TPs). (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A)) Dedicated-purpose pool pumps (DPPPs), which are the subject of this rulemaking, are a kind of pump for which DOE is authorized to establish test procedures and energy conservation standards. In 2016, DOE published in the
Federal Register
two final rules establishing energy conservation standards and a test procedure for commercial and industrial pumps. 81 FR 4368 (Jan. 26, 2016) and 81 FR 4086 (January 25, 2016), respectively. However, dedicated-purpose pool pumps were specifically excluded from those final rules. Based on recommendations of the industry and DOE's own analysis, DOE determined that dedicated-purpose pool pumps have a unique application and equipment characteristics that merit a separate analysis. As a result, DOE initiated separate rulemakings to establish energy conservation standards and test procedures for dedicated-purpose pool pumps. The following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish test procedures for dedicated-purpose pool pumps and relevant background information regarding DOE's consideration of establishing Federal regulations for this equipment.

A. Authority

Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 6291,
et seq.;
“EPCA” or, “the Act”) sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency.
1

Part C of Title III, which for editorial reasons was codified as Part A-1 upon incorporation into the U.S. Code (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317), establishes the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment. “Pumps” are listed as a type of industrial equipment covered by EPCA, although EPCA does not define the term “pump.” (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A)) DOE defined “pump” in a test procedure final rule (January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule) as equipment designed to move liquids (which may include entrained gases, free solids, and totally dissolved solids) by physical or mechanical action, and includes a bare pump and, if included by the manufacturer at the time of sale, mechanical equipment, driver, and controls. 81 FR 4086 (Jan. 25, 2016). Dedicated-purpose pool pumps, which are the subject of this final rule, meet this definition of a pump and are covered under the pump equipment type.

1
All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law 114-11 (Apr. 30, 2015).

Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. The testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for (1) certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted under EPCA, and (2) making representations about the efficiency of those products. Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.

Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered products. EPCA provides that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section shall be reasonably designed to produce test results that measure energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))

In addition, if DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, DOE must publish a proposed test procedure and offer the public an opportunity to present oral and written comments on it. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) Finally, in any rulemaking to amend a test procedure, DOE must determine to what extent, if any, the proposed test procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency of any covered product as determined under the existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1))

B. Background

Dedicated-purpose pool pumps are a style of pump for which DOE has not yet established a test procedure. Although in 2016 DOE completed final rules establishing energy conservation standards (81 FR 4368 (Jan. 26, 2016); January 2016 general pumps ECS final rule) and a test procedure (81 FR 4086 (Jan. 25, 2016); January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule) for certain categories and configurations of pumps, DOE declined in those rules to establish any requirements applicable to dedicated-purpose pool pumps because of their different equipment characteristics and applications. 81 FR 4086, 4094 (Jan. 25, 2016).

To begin a separate rulemaking for dedicated-purpose pool pumps, on May 8, 2015, DOE issued a Request for Information (RFI), hereafter referred to as the “May 2015 DPPP RFI.” The May 2015 DPPP RFI presented information and requested public comment about any definitions, metrics, test procedures, equipment characteristics, and typical applications relevant to DPPP equipment. 80 FR 26475. Following the publication of the May 2015 DPPP RFI, DOE began a process

through the Appliance Standards Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (ASRAC) to discuss conducting a negotiated rulemaking to develop standards and a test procedure for dedicated-purpose pool pumps as an alternative to the traditional notice and comment route that DOE had already begun. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008) On August 25, 2015, DOE published a notice of intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking working group for dedicated-purpose pool pumps (as previously defined, the “DPPP Working Group”) to negotiate, if possible, Federal standards for the energy efficiency of dedicated-purpose pool pumps and to announce the first public meeting. 80 FR 51483.

The DPPP Working Group met four times between September and December 2015
2

and concluded its negotiations on December 8, 2015, with a consensus vote to approve a term sheet containing recommendations to DOE on scope, metric, and the basis of the test procedure (“December 2015 DPPP Working Group recommendations”).
3

The term sheet containing these recommendations is available in the DPPP Working Group docket. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51) ASRAC subsequently voted unanimously to approve the December 2015 DPPP Working Group recommendations during a January 20, 2016, meeting. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 0052)

2
Details of the negotiations sessions can be found in the public meeting transcripts that are posted to the docket for the DPPP Working Group (
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008
).

3
The ground rules of the DPPP Working Group define consensus as no more than three negative votes. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-0008-0016 at p. 3) Concurrence was assumed absent overt dissent, evidenced by a negative vote. Abstention was not construed as a negative vote.

The DPPP Working Group also requested, and was ultimately granted, more time to discuss possible energy conservation standards for this equipment. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-NOC-0005, No. 71 at pp. 20-52) The meetings to discuss energy conservation standards commenced on March 21, 2016, (81 FR 10152, 10153) and concluded on June 23, 2016, with approval of a second term sheet (June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations). This term sheet contained Working Group recommendations related to scope, definitions, energy conservation standards, performance standards or design requirements for various styles of pumps, applicable test procedure, and labeling for dedicated-purpose pool pumps. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82) The definitions, DPPP test procedure, sampling provisions, enforcement requirements, and labeling requirements contained in this final rule reflect the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group contained in both the December 2015 and June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations.

On September 20, 2016, DOE published a proposed test procedure rulemaking for dedicated-purpose pool pumps (September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR), which proposed to implement the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group. 81 FR 64580. On September 26, 2016, DOE held a public meeting to discuss and request comment on the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR (September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR public meeting).

The test procedure adopted in this final rule reflects certain recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, as well as input from interested parties received in response to the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR. Provisions of this final rule that are directly pertinent to any of the approved DPPP Working Group recommendations are specified with a citation to the December 2015 or June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations and are noted with the recommendation number (
e.g.,
Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. #, Recommendation #X at p. Y). Additionally, in developing the provisions of this final rule, DOE also has referenced discussions from the DPPP Working Group meetings regarding potential actions or comments that may not have been formally approved as part of the DPPP Working Group recommendations. These references to discussions or suggestions of the DPPP Working Group not found in the DPPP Working Group recommendations will have a citation to meeting transcripts and the commenter, if applicable (
e.g.,
Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, [Organization], No. X at p. Y).

Finally, in this final rule, DOE responds to all comments received from interested parties in response to the proposals presented in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, either during the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR public meeting or in subsequent written comments. In response to the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE received 11 written comments in addition to the verbal comments made by interested parties during the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR public meeting. The commenters included: The Southern California Gas Company (SCG), Southern California Edison (SCE), and San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E), collectively referred to herein as the California Investor-Owned Utilities (CA IOUs); a joint comment by the Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC);
4

Pentair Aquatic Systems (Pentair); Hayward Industries, Inc. (Hayward); Waterway; Davey Water Products Pty Ltd. (Davey); the California Energy Commission (CEC); the Association of Pool & Spa Professionals (APSP); Nidec Motor Corporation (Nidec); Zodiac Pool Systems, Inc. (Zodiac); and the People's Republic of China (China). DOE identifies comments received in response to the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR by the commenter, the number of document as listed in the docket maintained at
www.regulations.gov
(Docket No. EERE-2016-BT-TP-0002), and the page number of that document where the comment appears (for example: Hayward, No. 4 at p. 1). If a comment was made verbally during the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR public meeting, DOE will also specifically identify those as being located in the NOPR public meeting transcript (for example: CA IOUs, public meeting transcript, No. 3 at p. 66).

4
ASAP was present at the September 2016 DPPP TP NOPR public meeting. When ASAP commented at the public meeting, comments will be indicated as ASAP. ASAP and NRDC submitted a joint written comment and written comments will be indicated as ASAP and NRDC.

Regarding comments, during the September 2016 DPPP test procedure public meeting, Hayward inquired if it was appropriate to suggest any modifications to previously negotiated language, if Hayward believed it could be helpful. (Hayward, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at p. 20) DOE requested feedback on a number of items in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR and welcomed comment from interested parties on any of the proposals contained in the NOPR. DOE notes that DPPP Working Group ground rules stipulate that each party, except individuals that have previously voted negatively on the final term sheet, agrees not to file negative comments or speak negatively on the proposed rule or its preamble to the extent they have the same substance and effect as the term sheet. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 16 at p. 5) However, these rules are not legally binding, but instead are good-faith principles to govern Working Group's negotiations. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, DOE must consider all relevant comments submitted concerning the

September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, and make modifications to the proposals, as necessary, in this final rule. (5 U.S.C. 553(c)) Specific required modifications are discussed in their relevant sections.

On January 18, 2017, DOE published a direct final rule containing energy conservation standards for dedicated-purpose pool pumps (
e.g.,
the January 2017 DPPP DFR), based on the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, with a compliance date of July 19, 2021. 82 FR 5650. After reviewing comments submitted during the 110-day comment period, on May 26, 2017, DOE published a confirmation of effective date and compliance date for the DFR. 82 FR 24218.

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule

In this final rule, DOE is amending subpart Y to 10 CFR part 431 to include definitions and a test procedure applicable to dedicated-purpose pool pumps. However, DOE is establishing a test procedure for only a specific subset of dedicated-purpose pool pumps. Specifically, this test procedure applies only to self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps, waterfall pumps, and pressure cleaner booster pumps. The test procedure does not apply to integral cartridge-filter pool pumps, integral sand-filter pool pumps, storable electric spa pumps, or rigid electric spa pumps. The test procedure is applicable to those varieties of pool pumps for which DOE established performance-based standards in the January 2017 DPPP DFR (82 FR 5650, 5743), as well as additional categories of dedicated-purpose pool pumps for which the DPPP Working Group did not propose standards. (See section III.B.6 for more information on the applicability of the new test procedure to different DPPP varieties).

In this final rule, DOE defines a new metric, the weighted energy factor (WEF), to characterize the energy performance of dedicated-purpose pool pumps within the scope of this test procedure. As described further in section III.C, WEF is determined as a weighted average of water volumetric flow rate divided by the input power to the dedicated-purpose pool pump at different load points. The specific load points and weights depend on the variety of the dedicated-purpose pool pump and the number of operating speeds with which it is distributed in commerce. In addition, the DPPP test procedure includes a test method to determine the self-priming capability of pool filter pumps to effectively differentiate self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps. Finally, the DPPP test procedure provides optional methods for determining the WEF for replacement DPPP motors.

DOE's new test method includes measurements of volumetric flow rate and input power, both of which are required to calculate WEF, as well as other quantities to effectively characterize the rated DPPP performance (
e.g.,
head, hydraulic output power, rotating speed). For consistent and uniform measurement of these values, DOE is incorporating by reference the test methods established in HI 40.6-2014, “Methods for Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing,” with certain exceptions. DOE reviewed the relevant sections of HI 40.6-2014 and determined that HI 40.6-2014, in conjunction with the additional test methods and calculations adopted in this test procedure, will produce test results that reflect the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated operating costs of a dedicated-purpose pool pump during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) DOE also reviewed the burdens associated with conducting the test procedure, including HI 40.6-2014, and, based on the results of such analysis, found that the test procedure is not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) DOE's analysis of the burdens associated with the test procedure is presented in section IV.B.

This final rule also establishes requirements regarding the sampling plan, certification requirements, and representations for dedicated-purpose pool pumps at subpart B of part 429 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The sampling plan requirements are similar to those for several other types of commercial equipment and are appropriate for dedicated-purpose pool pumps based on the expected range of measurement uncertainty and manufacturing tolerances for this equipment (see section III.K.1 for more detailed information). As DOE's DPPP test procedure contains methods for calculating the energy factor (EF),
5

overall (wire-to-water) efficiency, driver power input, DPPP nominal motor horsepower,
6

DPPP motor total horsepower, DPPP service factor, pump power output (hydraulic horsepower), and true power factor (PF), DOE also is adopting provisions regarding allowable representations of energy consumption, energy efficiency, and other relevant metrics manufacturers may make regarding DPPP performance (section III.H). DOE is also clarifying the appropriate use of such metrics through the use of two appendices: Appendix B, which contains metrics and test methods applicable to testing dedicated-purpose pool pumps prior to the compliance date of the established energy conservation standards for such equipment (
i.e.,
prior to July 19, 2021), and appendix C, which contains metrics and test methods applicable to testing dedicated-purpose pool pumps on or after the compliance date of any applicable energy conservation standards (
i.e.,
on and after July 19, 2021).

5
EF is a metric that is common in the DPPP industry and which describes the volume of water provided by a dedicated-purpose pool pump divided by the input power required to pump that amount of water in units of gallons per watt-hour (gal/Wh). The relevant test methods for determining EF are described in section III.F.

6
In this final rule, DOE is adopting specific test methods and metrics applicable to DPPP nominal motor horsepower, DPPP total horsepower, DPPP service factor, and rated hydraulic horsepower of dedicated-purpose pool pumps. See section III.G.1 for a discussion of the different horsepower metrics applicable to dedicated-purpose pool pumps and the adopted testing requirements applicable to these metrics.

Starting on July 19, 2021, the compliance date for the energy conservation standards that DOE established for dedicated-purpose pool pumps, all dedicated-purpose pool pumps within the scope of those standards must be certified in accordance with the amended subpart Y of part 431 and the applicable sampling requirements in 10 CFR 429.59. DOE is also requiring that, beginning on July 19, 2021, certain certification and compliance information must be reported to DOE on an annual basis (section III.K.2). Similarly, all representations regarding the energy efficiency or energy use of dedicated-purpose pool pumps within the scope of this DPPP test procedure should be made by testing in accordance with the adopted DPPP test procedure (appendix B) beginning 180 days after the publication date of this test procedure final rule in the
Federal Register
. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) DOE understands that manufacturers of dedicated-purpose pool pumps likely have historical test data (
e.g.,
existing pump curves) that were developed with methods consistent with the new DOE test procedure. DOE also understands that the DPPP test procedure is based on the same testing methodology used to generate most existing pump performance information. Consequently, DOE does not expect that manufacturers will need to regenerate all of the historical test data, as long as the original rating method is consistent with the methods adopted in this final rule, and the original tested units remain

representative of the basic model's current design. If the testing methods used to generate historical ratings for DPPP basic models are substantially different from those adopted in this final rule or the manufacturer has changed the design of the basic model, the representations resulting from the historical methods would no longer be valid. This is discussed in more detail in section III.F.

III. Discussion

In this final rule, DOE amends subpart Y of 10 CFR part 431 to add a new DPPP test procedure and related definitions, amends 10 CFR 429.59 to add a new sampling plan for dedicated-purpose pool pumps, and amends 10 CFR 429.110 and 429.134 to add new enforcement provisions for this equipment. The amendments are shown in Table III.1.

Table III.1—Summary of Amendments in This Final Rule, Their Location Within the Code of Federal Regulations, and the Applicable Preamble Discussion

Location
Amendment
Summary of additions

Applicable preamble
discussion

10 CFR 429.59
Test Procedure Sampling Plan and Certification Requirements
Minimum number of dedicated-purpose pool pumps to be tested to rate a DPPP basic model, determination of representative values, and certification reporting requirements
Section III.K and III.H.

10 CFR 429.110 & 429.134
Enforcement Provisions
Method for DOE determination of compliance of DPPP basic models
Section III.K.

10 CFR 431.462
Definitions
Definitions pertinent to categorizing and testing of dedicated-purpose pool pumps
Section III.B.

10 CFR 431.464, Appendix B, & Appendix C
Test Procedure
Instructions for determining the WEF (and other applicable performance characteristics) for applicable varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps and replacement DPPP motors
Sections III.C, III.D, III.E, III.H, III.F, and III.J.

10 CFR 431.466
Labeling
Requirements for labeling dedicated-purpose pool pumps
Section III.I.

The following sections discuss comments received from interested parties and DOE's final adopted provisions regarding (A) the scope of this rulemaking; (B) definitions related to the categorizing and testing of dedicated-purpose pool pumps; (C) the metric used to describe the energy performance of dedicated-purpose pool pumps; (D) the test procedure for different varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps; (E) the incorporation of HI 40.6-2014 as the test method for determining pump performance; (F) representations of energy use and energy efficiency; (G) additional test methods necessary to determine rated hydraulic horsepower,
7

other DPPP horsepower metrics,
8

and the self-priming capability of dedicated-purpose pool pumps; (H) labeling requirements for dedicated-purpose pool pumps; (I) an optional test method for replacement DPPP motors; and (J) certification and enforcement provisions for tested DPPP models.

7
Rated hydraulic horsepower refers to the hydraulic horsepower at maximum speed and full impeller diameter on the reference curve for the rated pump and is the metric DOE is referencing to describe the capacity of dedicated-purpose pool pumps. (See section III.G.1.)

8
DOE is adopting, based on the June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations, standardized methods for determining nominal motor horsepower, total horsepower, and service factor of a dedicated-purpose pool pump to support labeling provisions. The adopted test methods are discussed in section III.F and the labeling requirements are discussed in section III.I.

A.
General Comments

CA IOUs submitted a general comment expressing their support of the test procedure proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR and stating that the proposal reflected issues negotiated in the DPPP Working Group in 2015 and 2016. CA IOUs also encouraged DOE to publish a final rule for both the test procedure and energy conservation standards by the end of 2016 so that the standards can take effect as soon as possible. (CA IOUs, No. 9 at pp. 1-2) DOE appreciates the support of CA IOUs and has finalized this test procedure final rule in 2016. DOE addressed the energy conservation standards recommended by the DPPP Working Group in the January 2017 DPPP DFR. 82 FR 5650.

In response to the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, Hayward raised concerns on the number of requests for comment and new items outside the DPPP Working Group discussions and the possible need for a supplemental NOPR (SNOPR). (Hayward, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at pp. 5-6) DOE acknowledges that in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed a new DPPP test procedure, as well as several items recommended by the DPPP Working Group related to DPPP test procedure, such as definitions and test methods. In addition, the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR contained several items recommended by the DPPP Working Group that are not directly related to the DPPP test procedure, such as labeling and certification requirements. Finally, the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR contained a number of items that were not directly discussed or recommended by the DPPP Working Group, but are necessary to fully implement DOE's regulatory framework, such as a sampling plan for the determination of representative values and enforcement requirements.

While DOE recognizes that the number and breadth of the proposals contained in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR was significant, DOE maintains that many of the items are necessary to ensure DOE's DPPP regulations, once adopted, are comprehensive and robust. For example, the sampling plan provisions are necessary to describe how to determine uniform and consistent representative values from the test procedure results.

In addition, as discussed at length in the DPPP Working Group negotiations, the energy conservation standard recommended by the DPPP Working Group contains both performance and prescriptive requirements for different varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps, which must be implemented in a direct final rule. However, such a direct final rule can only contain the explicit consensus recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, since any additional provisions would not have the opportunity for public comment

through the direct final rule process. Therefore, some items typically implemented in standards rulemakings, such as certification reporting requirements and labeling provisions, were included in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, because, while they implemented the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, they contained additional details and minor provisions not explicitly recommended by the DPPP Working Group (see section III.I and III.K.2 for more information on the labeling and certification provisions, respectively).

Therefore, while DOE understands that the breadth of the proposals contained in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR may be greater than typical test procedure NOPRs, DOE believes that all the proposals are necessary to fully implement the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group and ensure comprehensive and robust DPPP regulations. In addition, DOE notes that interested parties had the opportunity to comment on all DOE's proposals in response to the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR and DOE has provided answers to all comments, and, where appropriate, has amended its proposal in response to the comments. Therefore, DOE believes that an SNOPR is not necessary.

In written comments, APSP and Pentair noted that DOE based the various efficiency levels considered for energy conservation standards during the DPPP Working Group negotiations on the WEF scores estimated for individual pump models using data from the ENERGY STAR Qualified Products List database. Pentair commented, and APSP agreed, that analysis they conducted using actual test data generated WEF scores that were different from DOE's estimates, sometimes by up to 20 percent. APSP and Pentair recommended that DOE reevaluate the various efficiency levels using actual test data instead of estimates based on ENERGY STAR data points. (APSP, No. 8 at p. 2; Pentair, No. 11 at p. 6) DOE interprets APSP and Pentair's comments to be specific to self-priming pool filter pumps, which are the only variety of pool pump that are listed in the ENERGY STAR Qualified Products List database.
9

9
ENERGY STAR maintains a database of certified products, including pool pumps. See
https://www.energystar.gov/productfinder/product/certified-pool-pumps/results
.

In response to APSP and Pentair, DOE notes that the tested data points for all self-priming pool filter pumps were based on certification data from the ENERGY STAR Qualified Products List database, as well as other entities besides ENERGY STAR. DOE incorporated certification data from the CEC (including current and historical data), APSP, and ENERGY STAR, and included other data provided by DPPP manufacturers in DOE's Self-Priming Pool Filter Pump database.
10

(Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 94 at pp. 24-30) DOE presumes the data in these databases to be accurate and determined in accordance with the appropriate test procedures. As discussed further in section III.H, these test procedures are consistent with the test procedure recommended by the DPPP Working Group and adopted by DOE in this final rule. Therefore, the data in the ENERGY STAR, CEC, and APSP databases are deemed to be consistent with data generated in accordance with the adopted DPPP test procedure.

10
Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 102.

DOE notes that WEF scores used to establish efficiency levels for single-speed and two-speed self-priming pool filter pumps were directly calculated from actual known test data points at appropriate load points, and no mathematical estimations were employed. However, as discussed in the DPPP Working Group, DOE acknowledges that, for variable-speed self-priming pool filter pumps, the WEF scores used to establish efficiency levels considered for energy conservation standards were mathematically estimated from certain known test data points contained in DOE's database. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 94 at pp. 26-31)

DOE pursued the mathematical estimation of WEF scores because the variable-speed self-priming pool filter pump performance data contained in above-mentioned databases does not always align with the load points (
i.e.,
speed settings) needed to evaluate each pump against the WEF metric. Specifically, DOE's mathematical estimations were derived from a regression analyses of known variable-speed self-priming pool filter pump data points. Furthermore, as DOE described during the DPPP Working Group meetings, DOE used actual test stand data provided by DPPP manufacturers to validate the estimation methodology. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 94 at pp. 28-34) Ultimately, DOE publically presented its regression methodology to the DPPP Working Group for input and no members of the DPPP Working Group offered sustained objections to the methodology or results during the Working Group meetings.
11

(Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 94 at pp. 24-34)

11
The CA IOUs initially objected to the results of the regression methodology, saying that previous CA IOU efforts had gathered data that did not fit the regression trend presented by DOE. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, CA IOUs, No. 94 at pp. 30-31) In a subsequent meeting the CA IOUs rescinded their objection and stated that previous CA IOUs analysis shows the same results as DOE's regression methodology. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, CA IOUs, No. 95 at pp. 4-5).

In addition, and as discussed in the DPPP Working Group, DOE acknowledges that the estimated WEF scores for variable-speed pumps are subject to mathematically uncertainty. As a part of the DPPP Working Group meetings, DOE mathematically quantified this uncertainty and provided the DPPP Working Group with a revised variable-speed efficiency level option that would conservatively account for this uncertainty. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 100 at pp. 118-121) Ultimately, as a part of their energy conservation standard negotiations, the DPPP Working Group decided not to account for such uncertainty in the variable-speed efficiency level. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 92 at pp. 281-283) Consequently, DOE believes that the concept of WEF score uncertainty for variable-speed pumps was well understood by the DPPP Working Group, including the commenters.

In general, DOE developed efficiency level options for the DPPP Working Group based on the best data and analytical methods that were available at the time. In light of the concerns raised by APSP and Pentair, DOE reevaluated its variable-speed WEF estimation methodology, but found no technical inaccuracies. In the absence of new data (noting that APSP and Pentair did not submit to DOE any test data to substantiate their claims), DOE has no means to adjust its variable-speed WEF estimation methodology at this time. Furthermore, DOE believes that data uncertainty concerns raised by APSP and Pentair were sufficiently considered by the DPPP Working Group, and adjustment to DOE's analysis, based on new test data (if made available), would not materially impact the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group. Therefore, DOE will not reevaluate self-priming pool filter pump efficiency levels using new test data, as recommended by APSP and Pentair. DOE notes that DOE established energy conservation standards as part of the January 2017 DPPP DFR. 82 FR 5650, 5743.

In written comments, Nidec stated that it believed that there should be a

public comment period for the related energy conservation standards and requested information on the timing of the ECS rulemaking as well as the opportunity for public review and comment. (Nidec, No. 10 at p. 4) DOE notes that the related energy conservation standards were negotiated through the DPPP Working Group and approved by ASRAC,
12

and that notice of all meetings were published in the
Federal Register
.
13

All meetings were open and provided opportunity for public comment. In addition, the public had 110 days to submit public comments on the DFR, which were considered by DOE prior to confirming the effective date and compliance date for the energy conservation standards. 82 FR 24218; May 26, 2017.

12
Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-NOC-0005, No. 87.

13
See
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=67
and
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008
.

B. Definitions

In this final rule, DOE is adopting definitions for the term dedicated-purpose pool pump, several sub-varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps, and the variations of DPPP operating speed configurations. DOE is also adopting definitions pertinent to categorizing and testing dedicated-purpose pool pumps in accordance with the DOE test procedure. In general, ASAP and NRDC commented that they agreed with DOE's proposed definitions. (ASAP and NRDC, No. 12 at p. 1) DOE appreciates the support of ASAP and NRDC. DOE presents these definitions in the subsequent sections. In addition, DOE is adopting definitions and methods for determining several terms related to describing DPPP capacity, including “rated hydraulic horsepower,” “dedicated-purpose pool pump nominal motor horsepower,” “dedicated-purpose pool pump service factor,” and “dedicated-purpose pool pump motor total horsepower.” These terms are discussed in detail in section III.G.1.

1. Existing Pump Definitions

DOE notes that because dedicated-purpose pool pumps are a style of pump, some terms defined at 10 CFR 431.462, as adopted in the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule, also apply to dedicated-purpose pool pumps, including bare pump, mechanical equipment, driver, and control. 81 FR 4086, 4090-4091 (Jan. 25, 2016). In addition, as dedicated-purpose pool pumps are end suction pumps, DOE believes the definition for end suction pump established in the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule also applies to dedicated-purpose pool pumps. In the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule, DOE defined “end suction pump” as a single-stage, rotodynamic pump in which the liquid enters the bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller shaft and on the side opposite the bare pump's driver-end. The liquid is discharged through a volute in a plane perpendicular to the shaft. 81 FR 4086, 4146 (Jan. 25, 2016). DOE notes that, as it is referenced in the definition for end suction pump, the definition for rotodynamic pump established in the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule also applies to dedicated-purpose pool pumps.
Id.
at 4147.

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE used the term “dry rotor” as a part of the definition of pressure cleaner booster pumps. 81 FR 64580, 64591 (Sept. 20, 2016). DOE also discussed how the term “dry rotor pump” applies to dedicated-purpose pool pumps and asserted that, to DOE's knowledge, all dedicated-purpose pool pumps are dry rotor (as defined in the January 2016 general pumps final rule
14

). 81 FR 64580, 64587 (Sept. 20, 2016) DOE requested comment on the assertion that all dedicated-purpose pool pumps are dry rotor pumps.

14
DOE defines “dry rotor pump” as a pump in which the motor rotor is not immersed in the pumped fluid. 10 CFR 431.462.

In written comments, APSP, Hayward, and Zodiac commented that all of the dedicated-purpose pool pumps covered by this rule are typically dry rotor pumps. (APSP, No. 8 at p.3; Hayward, No. 6 at p. 1; Zodiac, No. 13 at p. 1) However, APSP and Zodiac also requested a clearer definition of dry rotor and wet rotor style pumps. APSP, No. 8 at p. 3; Zodiac, No. 13 at p. 1) APSP, Hayward, and Zodiac also inquired how a wet rotor pump (such as a pump with a water-cooled motor) may be impacted by the dry rotor definition. (APSP, No. 8 at p.3; Hayward, No. 6 at p. 1; Zodiac, No. 13 at p. 1)

In response to APSP and Zodiac's request for clarification regarding the terms dry rotor and wet rotor, DOE defined dry rotor and wet rotor pumps in the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule. 81 FR 4086, 4146 (Jan. 25, 2016). Dry rotor pump means a pump in which the motor rotor is not immersed in the pumped fluid. Conversely, a wet rotor pump is one in which the motor rotor is immersed in the pumped liquid.
Id.
at 4101 (Jan. 25, 2016) The rotor is the portion of the motor that rotates and provides torque to output shaft (which may be integral to the rotor). For most motors varieties, including all known dedicated-purpose pool pump motors, the rotor is an internal component of the motor, which resides inside the motor stator. If any significant amount of liquid is present in-between the stator and rotor during operation, the rotation of the motor rotor will cause the liquid to surround or cover the rotor (
i.e.,
immerse it). Consequently, such a configuration would be considered a wet rotor pump. Alternatively, if a dedicated-purpose pool pump has no significant amount of liquid between stator and rotor, the rotation of the rotation will not cause the liquid to surround or cover the rotor (
i.e.,
immerse it), and thus such a configuration would not be considered a dry rotor pump. DOE notes that the water-resistance of, or ability to immerse, the exterior casing of a motor has no relation to the definition of wet rotor and dry rotor pump.

DOE believes these definitions are clear and unambiguous and do not require further clarification.

Regarding how a wet rotor pump would be treated under DOE's new dedicated-purpose pool pump regulations, DOE understands that pressure cleaner booster pumps are the only variety of dedicated-purpose pool pump that use the term “dry rotor” within the definition (
i.e.,
a pressure cleaner booster pump is a dry rotor pump). Consequently, the test procedure will only be applicable to dry rotor pressure cleaner booster pumps, as non-dry rotor variants would not meet the definition of a pressure cleaner booster pump. The remaining varieties of dedicated purpose pool pumps make no specification to whether the pump is, or is not, dry rotor. Consequently, both dry rotor and non-dry rotor pumps will meet certain definitions established in this final rule, and would thus be subject to the test procedure.

DOE received no other comments regarding the use of dry rotor, within the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump. Therefore, the term dry rotor pump will remain a part of the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump.

Additional definitions from the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule that apply to dedicated-purpose pool pumps, include the definition of basic model (discussed further in section III.B.8), the definitions incorporated by reference from HI 40.6-2014 (discussed further in section III.E.1), and the definition of self-priming pump (discussed further in section III.B.3.a). While other terms may be applicable to the description of

dedicated-purpose pool pumps, they are not referenced in any of the DPPP definitions or specifications of the DPPP test procedure.

2. Definition of Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump

Consistent with the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, DOE proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR to define dedicated-purpose pool pump as follows:

Dedicated-purpose pool pump
comprises self-priming pool filter pumps, non-self-priming pool filter pumps, waterfall pumps, pressure cleaner booster pumps, integral sand-filter pool pumps, integral-cartridge filter pool pumps, storable electric spa pumps, and rigid electric spa pumps. 81 FR 64580, 64587 (Sept. 20, 2016).

DOE received no comments in response to the proposed definition of dedicated-purpose pool pump. Therefore, DOE is adopting the definition of dedicated-purpose pool pump as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR.

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE also proposed definitions for each DPPP variety based on DPPP Working Group recommendations. These definitions are discussed in more detail in sections III.B.3, III.B.4, and III.B.5.

3. Pool Filter Pumps

Pool filter pumps are the most common style of dedicated-purpose pool pump. A “pool filter pump” or “pool circulation pump” is typically used to refer to an end suction style pump that circulates water through a pool and filtration system and removes large debris using a basket strainer or other device. Consistent with the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to define pool filter pump as an end suction pump that

(a) either:

(1) Includes an integrated basket strainer, or

(2) does not include an integrated basket strainer, but requires a basket strainer for operation, as stated in manufacturer literature provided with the pump; and

(b) may be distributed in commerce connected to, or packaged with, a sand filter, removable cartridge filter, or other filtration accessory, so long as the filtration accessory is connected with consumer-removable connections that allow the pump to be plumbed to bypass the filtration accessory. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at pp. 2-3); 81 FR 64580, 64587 (Sept. 20, 2016).

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed definition of pool filter pump. No comments, negative or positive, were received regarding the proposed definition of pool filter pump. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE adopts the definition of pool filter pump as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR.

a. Definition of a Basket Strainer and Filtration Accessories

The definition of pool filter pump includes the use of a basket strainer to differentiate pool filter pumps from other varieties of end suction pumps. To clearly and unambiguously establish what would be considered a basket strainer when applying the pool filter pump definition, the DPPP Working Group recommended to define “basket strainer” as “a perforated or otherwise porous receptacle that prevents solid debris from entering a pump, when mounted within a housing on the suction side of a pump. The basket strainer receptacle is capable of passing spherical solids of 1 mm in diameter, and can be removed by hand or using only simple tools. Simple tools include but are not limited to a screwdriver, pliers, and an open-ended wrench.” (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at pp. 2-3)

To establish what would be considered a “removable cartridge filter” and to differentiate removable cartridge filters from basket strainers, the DPPP Working Group recommended that the definitions of basket strainer and removable cartridge filter include a specification for the diameter of spherical solid that the basket strainer or filter component is capable of passing. The DPPP Working Group recommended a definition for “removable cartridge filter” as “a filter component with fixed dimensions that captures and removes suspended particles from water flowing through the unit. The removable cartridge filter is not capable of passing spherical solids of 1 mm in diameter, can be removed from the filter housing by hand or using only simple tools, and is not a sand filter. Simple tools include but are not limited to a screwdriver, pliers, and an open-ended wrench.” (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at pp. 2-3)

Similarly, to clearly differentiate sand filters from other filtration apparatuses, such as basket strainers and removable cartridge filters, the DPPP Working Group recommended defining “sand filter” as “a device designed to filter water through sand or an alternate sand-type media.” The definition for sand filter is intended to include all depth filters that allow fluid to pass through while retaining particulates and debris in a porous filtration medium. In the DPPP equipment industry, such a filter is most commonly made with sand, but could also be made with other media such as diatomaceous earth. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 58 at pp. 91-96)

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE noted that these definitions are useful in clearly differentiating different styles of pool filter pumps, including integral cartridge-filter and sand-filter pool pumps, from those that have non-integral filtration accessories. As such, DOE proposed adopting the definitions for basket strainer, removable cartridge filter, and sand filter, as recommended by the DPPP Working Group. 81 FR 64580; 64587-88 (Sept. 20, 2016).

In response to the proposed definition of basket strainer, Pentair submitted a written comment stating that there is a possibility of manufacturers using the 1mm size restriction as a loophole to create a strainer basket with very small openings, which would not meet DOE's definition for pool filter pumps. Pentair acknowledged that doing so would significantly limit the utility of the pump in pool filtration applications. However, Pentair noted that consumers could throw away the original basket strainer and replace it with one that has more reasonable opening size. (Pentair, No. 11 at p. 1)

In response, DOE acknowledges Pentair's concern regarding the potential for manufacturers to circumvent the regulation through adjusting the opening size on the basket strainer. In the DPPP Working Group negotiations, the DPPP Working Group discussed the opening size as the clearest and most unambiguous way to differentiate between basket strainers and removable cartridge filters. During that discussion, Hayward raised the possibility that the filter basket opening size may limit future design flexibility. DOE responded that DOE definitions and analysis are developed around filter basket designs that are currently available on the market. DOE also noted that a filtration apparatus that does not meet the definition established in this rule could be considered in a future rulemakings, if such designs are developed. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, CA IOUs, DOE, Waterway, and Zodiac, No. 53 at pp. 13-19) Also, as noted by Pentair, the opening size of the basket filter directly impacts its utility as a

filtration device. Therefore, DOE believes that the market will effectively discourage manufacturers from producing pool filter pumps with ineffective basket filters. However, DOE will monitor the market as this test procedure and associated energy conservation standards take effect and, if DOE observes any such circumvention, DOE may reconsider the definition of basket strainer as necessary.

DOE received no other comments related to the proposed definitions of basket strainer, removable cartridge filter, or sand filter. Therefore, DOE is adopting the definitions of these terms as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR.

b. Self-Priming and Non-Self-Priming Pool Filter Pumps

All pool filter pumps on the market are either self-priming or non-self-priming. Self-priming pumps are able to lift liquid that originates below the centerline of the pump inlet and, after initial manual priming, are able to subsequently re-prime without the use of external vacuum sources, manual filling, or a foot valve. In contrast, non-self-priming pumps must be manually primed prior to start up each time. Accordingly, self-priming pumps are constructed in a different manner than non-self-priming pumps and have different energy use characteristics. Specifically, self-priming pool filter pumps typically incorporate a diffuser that maintains the prime on the pump between periods of operation. The diffuser affects the energy performance of the pump because it can decrease the maximum achievable energy efficiency.

In addition, whether a pool filter pump is self-priming or not also impacts the typical applications for self-priming versus non-self-priming pool filter pumps. Specifically, in the DPPP equipment industry, self-priming pool filter pumps are often referred to as “inground pool pumps” and non-self-priming pool filter pumps are often referred to as “aboveground pool pumps.” Accordingly, the DPPP Working Group proposed to analyze self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps separately. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #2A at p. 2)

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, based on feedback from the DPPP Working Group, DOE proposed definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps, as well as a method to differentiate the two. Specifically, in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed the following definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps:

Self-priming pool filter pump
means a pool filter pump that is certified under NSF/ANSI 50-2015
15

to be self-priming or is capable of re-priming to a vertical lift of at least 5.0 feet with a true priming time less than or equal to 10.0 minutes, when tested in accordance with NSF/ANSI 50-2015, and is not a waterfall pump.

15
NSF International (NSF)/ANSI Standard 50-2015, (“NSF/ANSI 50-2015”), “Equipment for Swimming Pools, Spas, hot Tubs and Other Recreational Water Facilities.”

Non-self-priming pool filter pump
means a pool filter pump that is not certified under NSF/ANSI 50-2015 to be self-priming and is not capable of re-priming to a vertical lift of at least 5.0 feet with a true priming time less than or equal to 10.0 minutes, when tested in accordance with NSF/ANSI 50-2015, and is not a waterfall pump. 81 FR 64580, 64647-68 (Sept. 20, 2016).

The definitions are consistent with the NSF/ANSI 50-2015 self-priming designation such that any pumps certified as self-priming under NSF/ANSI 50-2015 would be treated as self-priming pool filter pumps under the DOE regulations, even if such a pump was certified based on manufacturer's specified or recommended vertical lift and/or true priming time. However, as certification with NSF/ANSI 50-2015 is voluntary, the definitions also adopt specific criteria in terms of vertical lift and true priming time that are applicable to any pool filter pumps not certified as self-priming under NSF/ANSI 50-2015. The criterion for vertical lift is specified as 5.0 feet, consistent with the NSF/ANSI 50-2015 requirement. This ensures that all pool filter pumps that can achieve a vertical lift of 5.0 feet (within the required true priming time), whether they are certified with NSF/ANSI or not, would be considered a self-priming pool filter pump under DOE's regulations.

The criterion for true priming time recommended by the DPPP Working Group and proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR is 10.0 minutes, as opposed to the 6 minutes specified in NSF/ANSI 50-2015. 81 FR 64580, 64589 and 64647 (Sept. 20, 2016). This is because the 6 minute threshold is a minimum, and manufacturers believed that some pool filter pumps that are currently considered self-priming pool filter pumps in the industry have true priming times greater than 6 minutes. Thus, the DPPP Working Group believed that 10.0 minutes was more appropriate and comprehensive. 81 FR 64580, 64589 (Sept. 20, 2016). DOE proposed a vertical lift and true priming time of 5.0 feet and 10.0 minutes in order to clearly specify the appropriate and required level of precision in the definitions and test method.
Id.

DOE notes that these definitions rely on the NSF/ANSI 50-2015 test method to determine self-priming capability. DOE's test procedure for determining self-priming capability, including the incorporation by reference of the NSF/ANSI 50-2015 test method, is discussed further in section III.G.2.

The definitions proposed for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR also explicitly exclude waterfall pumps. As discussed in section III.B.4.a, waterfall pumps are pool filter pumps and could meet a definition of either self-priming or non-self-priming, unless explicitly excluded from those definitions. Because DOE intended for these pumps to be treated specifically as waterfall pumps, the proposed definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps both specifically excluded waterfall pumps.

DOE notes that, in the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule, DOE already defined the term “self-priming pump” as a pump that (1) is designed to lift liquid that originates below the centerline of the pump inlet; (2) contains at least one internal recirculation passage; and (3) requires a manual filling of the pump casing prior to initial start-up, but is able to re-prime after the initial start-up without the use of external vacuum sources, manual filling, or a foot valve. 81 FR 4086, 4147 (Jan. 25, 2016). However, in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE discussed how this definition is not applicable to dedicated-purpose pool pumps because pool filter pumps typically do not contain a recirculation passage to accomplish the self-priming function. Therefore, DOE proposed to revise the definition of self-priming pump to ensure the definition of self-priming is comprehensive and consistent with the new definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pump. Specifically, DOE proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR to modify the existing definition of self-priming pump to also include self-priming pool filter pumps, in addition to the other referenced criteria. 81 FR 64580, 64648 (Sept. 20, 2016).

In response to DOE's proposal, CEC commented in support of DOE's proposal to differentiate self-priming from non-self-priming pool pumps

using the NSF/ANSI 50-2015. (CEC, No. 7 at p.2)

During the September 2016 public meeting, Hayward requested clarification of the reference to NSF/ANSI 50-2015 asking if changes are made to that standard, would manufacturers be bound to those changes. (Hayward, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at p. 20) As stated during the September 2016 public meeting, DOE incorporates by reference a specific edition of a specific standard. If that standard is updated, DOE would need to update the reference within their test procedure. Until such an update is made, manufacturers are held to the standard adopted in the DOE test procedure.

Hayward also submitted a written comment in response to DOE's proposed definition of self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps. Hayward recommended that DOE remove the requirement to test whether a non-self-priming pump is capable of self-priming. Hayward stated that requiring pumps not marketed or sold as self-priming pumps to be tested for self-priming capability would be unnecessarily burdensome. Hayward recommended that the definition of non-self-priming pumps be revised to designate pumps that are “not marketed or sold as self-priming,” rather than pumps that are not capable of self-priming. (Hayward, No. 6 at p.1)

In response to Hayward's inquiry, DOE clarifies that manufacturers may certify their pump models to DOE as non-self-priming without testing, so long as manufacturers are certain that the non-self-priming pump model has vertical lift (of lack thereof) and true priming time characteristics consistent with DOE's definition of non-self-priming pool filter pump. That is, the non-self-priming pump would meet the definition of non-self-priming, if it were to be tested in accordance with DOE's test method for verifying self-priming capability (see section III.G.2). Consequently, manufacturers are not required to actually test each non-self-priming pump model to prove that such a pump is non-self-priming. However, DOE will use the definition of non-self-priming pool filter pump and the additional test method described in section III.G.2 to ensure that manufacturers are properly categorizing their pool filter pumps as either self-priming or non-self-priming in accordance with the adopted definitions. Consequently, DOE believes that the definition of non-self-priming pool filter pumps does not introduce any additional testing burden, as DOE believes that manufacturers already know whether their pumps currently marketed as “non-self-priming” would meet the definition established in this final rule. With no additional burden, DOE believes that amending the definition of non-self-priming pool filter pumps is not warranted. In addition, DOE notes that establishing a clear, quantitative threshold to differentiate self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps is important to confirm that the pumps are appropriately differentiated based on the utility (
i.e.,
self-priming capability) they are able to provide.

Hayward also requested clarification regarding the definition of self-priming pool filter pumps. APSP and Hayward asked if 10 minutes is the maximum time allowed to reach prime and meet the self-priming requirement. (APSP, No. 8 at p. 3; Hayward, No. 6 at p.1)

The proposed definition for a self-priming pool filter pump allows manufacturers to meet the definition of self-priming pool filter pump in one of two ways. Manufacturers may show that a pool filter pump is self-priming by certifying the pool filter pump as self-priming in accordance with NSF/ANSI 50-2015. Alternatively, manufacturers may show that a pool filter pump is a self-priming pool filter pump by demonstrating that a pump is capable of re-priming to a vertical lift of at least 5.0 feet with a true priming time of less than or equal to 10.0 minutes, without certifying the pump to NSF/ANSI 50-2015. 81 FR 64580, 64589. The NSF/ANSI 50-2015 standard does not specify a maximum true priming time. Section C.3.5 of NSF/ANSI 50-2015 states that, “if a pump is to be designated as self-priming, the true priming time for each run shall not exceed 6 min or the manufacturer's recommended time, whichever is greater.” To certify a pump's self-priming capability under NSF/ANSI 50-2015, a manufacturer could recommend a true priming time greater than 10.0 minutes. Under the proposed definition of self-priming pool filter pump, if a pool filter pump has true priming time greater than 10.0 minutes but is certified as self-priming under NSF/ANSI 50-2015, that pump would qualify as a self-priming pool filter pump. However, if the pump is not certified under NSF/ANSI 50-2015, the pump must be capable of re-priming to a vertical lift of 5.0 feet with a true priming time of less than or equal to 10.0 minutes in order to be classified as a self-priming pump.

In written comments, Pentair pointed out that NSF requires pumps to prime to 10 feet in order to be classified as “self-priming” without listing a qualifying height, but allows a product to be certified as self-priming in the 5 to 10 foot range if accompanied by a qualifying height and time to prime. Pentair added that DOE's proposal does not require the listing of the qualifying height and suggested that the definition of self-priming pump should reflect the non-qualified definition of 10 feet. (Pentair, No. 11 at p. 1)

Pentair also disagreed with DOE's attempt to separate dedicated-purpose pool pumps intended for aboveground and inground applications by using non-self-priming and self-priming characteristics, respectively. Specifically, Pentair argued that there are many self-priming aboveground pumps currently in the market that would become non-viable under DOE's proposed definitions. Pentair further notes that while modifications could be made to these existing aboveground pumps to prevent them from priming, such changes would negatively impact pump efficiency and reduce energy savings for this category of non-self-priming pumps. (Pentair, No. 11 at p. 2)

In response to Pentair's comments regarding DOE's specified vertical lift of 5.0 feet, DOE recommended the vertical lift of 5.0 feet based on the discussions and recommendation of the DPPP Working Group. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, Hayward, No. 79 at pp. 160; Zodiac, No. 79 at pp. 161-162) DOE notes that, as mentioned previously, this ensures that all pool filter pumps that can achieve a vertical lift of 5.0 feet (within the required true priming time), whether they are certified with NSF/ANSI or not, would be considered a self-priming pool filter pump under DOE's regulations. DOE reviewed NSF/ANSI 50-2015 and notes that, contrary to Pentair's comment, section 6.9.1 of NSF/ANSI 50-2015 requires that the maximum vertical lift be specified if the pump is designated as self-priming, as determined in accordance with section C.3 of NSF/ANSI 50-2015. NSF/ANSI 50-2015 does not appear to provide the discretion indicated by Pentair if the vertical lift is 10 feet. In this final rule, DOE is adopting a definition specifying a vertical lift of 5.0 feet, as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, to maintain consistency with NSF/ANSI 50-2015.

In response to Pentair's comments regarding the differentiation of self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps, DOE proposed to differentiate these two styles of pool filter pumps based on the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #2A at p. 2) DOE acknowledges that one factor associated

with the differentiation of self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps is their ability to service inground pools. That is, the capability of a pump to self-prime is a fundamental utility associated with the ability of a pump to service an inground pool, as the pump is typically installed on the ground next to the pool, above the water line of the pool. Therefore, the pump must be self-priming in order to reliably circulate water on a continual basis. Conversely, pumps serving aboveground pools are typically installed below the water line and, therefore, gravity can serve to maintain the prime in the pump. Although pumps serving aboveground pools could be self-priming or non-self-priming, self-priming pumps do not provide the same utility to aboveground pools because they require modifications that reduce the energy efficiency benefits that self-priming pumps provide. Non-self-priming pumps do not require those modifications, which benefits the consumer and provides a distinct utility to the end user. This utility is a feature that allows DOE to separate the two styles of pumps into distinct equipment classes. In addition, self-priming pumps are more efficient than non-self-priming pumps, and merging the product classes could result in the unavailability of the feature that non-self-priming pumps provide. For these reasons, consistent with the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group, in this final rule DOE adopts definitions of non-self-priming and self-priming pool filter pumps based on their capability to self-prime.

DOE received no other comments related to the proposed definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps or the revision to the definition of self-priming pump established in the January 2016 general pumps test procedure final rule. However, in reviewing the definitions, DOE notes that the vertical lift and true priming time should refer to the DOE test method to verifying self-priming capability, which DOE is adopting in this final rule (see section III.G.2) as opposed to the test method in NSF/ANSI 50-2015. As discussed in section III.G.2, DOE's test method for verifying self-priming capability incorporates by reference the test method in section C.3 of NSF/ANSI 50-2015, but also adds several clarifications and additions to improve the repeatability and consistency of the test. DOE believes this is consistent with the DPPP Working Group's intent, whereby a self-priming pool filter pump would either be certified with NSF/ANSI 50-2015 or have the specified vertical lift and true priming time. DOE's self-priming capability test method is designed to verify the criteria established by the DPPP Working Group. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps based on certification with NSF/ANSI 50-2015 and the criteria recommended by the DPPP Working Group, as tested pursuant to the DOE test procedure, with minor modifications regarding the level of precision required by the criteria. DOE is also adopting the changes proposed to the definition of self-priming pump to align with the new definitions for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps.

c. Integral Cartridge-Filter and Integral Sand-Filter Pool Pumps

Most self-priming and non-self-priming filter pumps are installed in permanent inground or aboveground pools. However, a significant market also exists for temporary pools;
e.g.,
inflatable or collapsible pools that can be deflated or collapsed when not in use. Although temporary pools also require dedicated-purpose pool pumps to circulate and filter the water, these pools are typically served by a unique style of dedicated-purpose pool pump that is exclusively distributed in commerce with a temporary pool or as a replacement pump for such a pool. Some of these pumps are integrally and permanently mounted to a filtration accessory such as an integral cartridge-filter or sand-filter. These particular pumps can only be operated with the integral filtration accessory inline—the filtration accessory cannot be plumbed out for the purposes of testing. The DPPP Working Group recommended establishing prescriptive requirements for these pumps, which requires that timers be distributed in commerce with the pumps. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51, Recommendation #2B at pp. 1-2) With a prescriptive standard, the performance-related metric (
i.e.,
WEF) and test procedure would not be necessary and, therefore, not applicable.

To clearly differentiate integral cartridge-filter and integral sand-filter pool pumps from other varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps, the DPPP Working Group recommended definitions for integral cartridge-filter pool pump and integral sand-filter pool pump. The recommended definitions create differentiation based on the physical construction of the pump. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at pp. 2-3) In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to adopt the definitions for integral cartridge-filter pool pump and integral sand-filter pool pump recommended by the DPPP Working Group, with a few minor changes to use consistent terminology in both definitions. Specifically, DOE proposed the following definitions for integral cartridge-filter pool pump and integral sand-filter pool pump:

Integral cartridge-filter pool pump
means a pump that requires a removable cartridge filter, installed on the suction side of the pump, for operation; and the cartridge filter cannot be bypassed.

Integral sand-filter pool pump
means a pump distributed in commerce with a sand filter that cannot be bypassed. 81 FR 64580, 64590 (Sept. 20, 2016).

APSP stated that the proposed definitions for integral cartridge-filter pool pump and integral sand-filter pool pump are acceptable and consistent with DPPP Working Group meetings. (APSP, No. 8 at p. 3) DOE appreciates APSP's comment. DOE received no other comments related to the proposed definitions for integral cartridge-filter pool pump and integral sand-filter pool pump. Therefore, DOE is adopting the definitions as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR.

4. Other Varieties of Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

In addition to pool filter pumps, DOE identified varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps that are used to drive auxiliary pool equipment such as pool cleaners and water features. These pumps, which include waterfall pumps and pressure cleaner booster pumps, are discussed in greater detail in the following sections.

a. Waterfall Pumps

Within the pool pump industry, a certain variety of pump exists, which is specifically intended to pump water for water features, such as waterfalls. These pumps are similar in construction to pool filter pumps, except that they only have limited head and speed operating ranges. DOE refers to these pumps as waterfall pumps. Waterfall pumps meet the definition of pool filter pump discussed in section III.B.3.a, but are always equipped with a lower speed motor (approximately 1,800 rpm) in order to provide the specific high flow, low head characteristics required for typical water feature applications. Based on this unique construction and end user utility, the DPPP Working Group recommended to differentiate waterfall pumps from self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51

Recommendation #4 at pp. 2-4) In accordance with the intent of the December 2015 DPPP Working Group's recommendation, DOE proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR to define waterfall pump as “a pool filter pump with maximum head less than or equal to 30 feet, and a maximum speed less than or equal to 1,800 rpm.” 81 FR 64580, 64590 (Sept. 20, 2016). This definition uses maximum head and a specific maximum speed to distinguish waterfall pumps from other varieties of pool filter pumps.

During the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR public meeting, Pentair pointed out that there was a minor typo on page 81 FR 64590 regarding the description of waterfall pumps. Pentair noted that the text read “the DPPP Working Group agreed that all currently available waterfall pumps utilize 4-pole motors, as their low flow requirements do not necessitate the use of a higher speed 2-pole motor” where it should actually refer to their low head requirements, not low flow requirements. (Pentair, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at p. 74) APSP and Pentair reiterated this point in their written comments, pointing out that it is the low head requirements that make use of a higher speed 2-pole motor unnecessary. (APSP, No. 8 at p. 2; Pentair, No. 11 at p. 5) DOE agrees with APSP and Pentair that the statement should refer to the low head requirements of waterfall pumps and that the preamble text in the NOPR was in error.

DOE received no other comments related to the proposed definition of waterfall pump. Therefore, DOE is adopting the definition of waterfall pump as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, with the clarification that the maximum head value is the value certified to DOE.

b. Pressure Cleaner Booster Pumps

Pressure cleaner booster pumps provide water pressure that is used to propel pressure-side pool cleaners along the bottom of the pool and remove debris as the cleaner moves. To perform this task, a pressure cleaner booster pump must provide high head (
i.e.,
pressure) at a low flow.

The DPPP Working Group recommended that pressure cleaner booster pumps be included as a variety of dedicated-purpose pool pump, subject to the test procedure, and specifically considered in the analysis to support potential energy conservation standards. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51, Recommendation #1 at p. 1, #2A at p. 2, and #6 at p. 5) However, the DPPP Working Group did not recommend a definition of pressure cleaner booster pump due to the difficulty of effectively differentiating pressure cleaner booster pumps from other DPPP varieties. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at p. 3) Instead, the DPPP Working Group recommended that DOE develop an appropriate definition.

After considering the design, construction, and performance of pressure cleaner booster pumps, DOE determined that the most effective differentiator for pressure cleaner booster pumps is the fact that they are designed and marketed for a specific pressure-side cleaning application. Therefore, to effectively differentiate pressure cleaner booster pumps from other pump varieties, DOE proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR to define “pressure cleaner booster pump” as an end suction, dry rotor pump designed and marketed for pressure-side pool cleaner applications, and which may be UL listed under ANSI/UL 1081-2014, “Standard for Swimming Pool Pumps, Filters, and Chlorinators.” 81 FR 64580, 65491-92 (Sept. 20, 2016).

In response to definition of pressure cleaner booster pump proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, the CA IOUs suggested that DOE should include the UL listing as a requirement rather than an illustrative characteristic. CA IOUs justified this suggestion, by reasoning that in order to be used on pools, most local inspection authorities would want to see the UL label. (CA IOUs, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at pp. 18-19) Conversely, in written comments, Hayward, APSP, and Zodiac asserted that the phrase “be UL listed” should not be included in the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump as it would require a manufacturer to work solely with UL and that DOE should not seek to require manufacturers to list pressure cleaner booster pumps in accordance with a 3rd party, voluntary standard. (Hayward, No. 6, at p. 2; APSP, No. 8 at p. 3; Zodiac, No. 13 at pp. 1-2) Hayward, APSP, and Zodiac further questioned the benefit of adding a statement referencing the UL standard since, while UL 1081 is the de facto standard and is applicable to all DPPP, it is not a requirement in the United States to certify products to the standard and it does not necessarily distinguish a pressure cleaner booster pump from a non-pressure cleaner booster pump. (
Id.
)

As noted during the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR public meeting, DOE does not wish to narrow or restrict the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump to only those pumps UL listed under ANSI/UL 1081, because DOE is not fully confident that all pressure cleaner booster pumps require such a listing in order to be installed in all pools in the United States. This understanding is consistent with Hayward, APSP, and Zodiac's written comments suggesting removing the reference to ANSI/UL 1081 certification. Therefore, because it is possible that some jurisdictions may not require such a listing, DOE does not wish to limit the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump to pumps with a UL listing if the pump is in fact designed and marketed for pressure-side pool cleaner applications. However, DOE agrees with CA IOUs that the majority of jurisdictions require UL listing for installation of dedicated-purpose pool pumps, including pressure cleaner booster pumps, in pools. This is why DOE believes that such listing is a useful characteristic to use for distinguishing pressure cleaner booster pumps from other end suction pumps not intended for pools. While helpful, this reference does not require pressure cleaner booster pumps to be certified with UL or any other 3rd party entity. The controlling criteria for determining whether a pump meets DOE's definition of pressure cleaner booster pump is whether that pump is designed and marketed for pressure-side cleaner applications. As such, DOE believes that referencing ANSI/UL 1081 certification continues to be a useful, illustrative indicator for identifying pressure cleaner booster pumps, although it is not mandatory and pressure cleaner booster pumps may still meet the definition regardless of whether they are certified under ANSI/UL 1081 or not. That is, DOE believes the intended application of the pump, as indicated by the pump's own marketing literature, is the best indication of whether or not that pump is a pressure cleaner booster pump, regardless of whether the pump is UL listed under ANSI/UL 1081.

APSP, Hayward, and Zodiac also pointed out in their written comments that the current edition of ANSI/UL 1081 is the 2016 version of the standard, not the 2014 version proposed to be incorporated by reference in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR. (APSP, No. 8 at p.3; Hayward, No. 6 at pp. 1-2; Zodiac, No. 13 at pp. 1-2) DOE has reviewed ANSI/UL 1081-2016 and finds it to be similar in content and intent to the 2014 edition of the standard. Therefore, in order to reference the most recent and relevant version, DOE is incorporating by

reference ANSI/UL 1081-2016 in this final rule.

No other comments were received related to the proposed definition of pressure cleaner booster pump. Therefore, for the reasons discussed in this section and the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE is adopting the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, except the adopted definition references ANSI/UL 1081-2016 instead of ANSI/UL 1081-2014.

To provide clarity and remove ambiguity when applying the definition for pressure cleaner booster pump, DOE also proposed a definition for “designed and marketed” that DOE would use when determining the applicability of any DPPP test procedure or energy conservation standards to such pumps. Specifically, DOE proposed to define “designed and marketed” as meaning that the equipment is specifically designed to fulfill the indicated application and, when distributed in commerce, is designated and marketed for that application, with the designation on the packaging and all publicly available documents (
e.g.,
product literature, catalogs, and packaging labels). 81 FR 64580, 64647 (Sept. 20, 2016).

In response to this proposal, CA IOUs expressed concern that the inclusion of “designed and marketed” in the definition of pressure cleaner booster pump could create a loophole where products could be used as pressure cleaner booster pumps even if not specifically marketed for that purpose and, in turn, avoid regulation. (CA IOUs, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at pp. 23-24) ASAP also commented that the proposed definition for designed and marketed seemed to be narrow, pointing to a scenario where a pump is designed as a booster pump for pool applications but is also marketed by the manufacturer for another application. ASAP requested clarification if in this scenario the pump in question would be required to meet the standard. (ASAP, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at pp. 22-23) In written comments, ASAP and NRDC also encouraged DOE to attempt to ensure that the definition for “designed and marketed” does not contain any loopholes. Specifically, ASAP and NRDC supported the definition of designed and marketed presented in the regulatory text portion of the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR over the one presented in the preamble.
16

Additionally, ASAP and NRDC encouraged DOE to consider whether removing the word “specifically” may further reduce the possibility for potential loopholes and suggested removing the word “all” from “all publicly available documents” to ensure pumps are considered pressure cleaner booster pumps in cases where the designation is on some publicly available documents, but not others. (ASAP and NRDC, No. 12 at pp. 1-2) Similarly, CA IOUs recommended that DOE remove the word “specifically,” in order to address pumps designed for both pressure cleaner and domestic water booster pump applications, and change “all” to “any” publicly available documents. (CA IOUs, No. 9 at pp. 2-3)

16
The definition of designed and marketed contained in the preamble (81 FR 64580, 6464592; Sept. 20, 2016) did not exactly match the definition of designed and marketed proposed in the regulatory text (
Id.
at 64647). Specifically, the preamble definition contained the words “exclusively” and “solely.”

In response to CA IOUs' concern about pumps used as pressure cleaner booster pumps but not marketed as such, DOE acknowledges that some individuals may attempt to use inappropriate pumps to run pressure-side cleaner applications. However, it is DOE's understanding that pressure-side pool cleaners are designed to be paired with pumps with specific characteristics (
e.g.,
high head and low flow) and that manufacturers all design and market specific pumps intended for this application. DOE also notes that pumps without these specific characteristics would not provide adequate utility in the pressure-side pool application and manufacturers would recommend against the use of such pumps with their pressure-side cleaners. Therefore, while DOE acknowledges the concern of CA IOUs, DOE cannot control the actions of installers who may select inappropriate pumps for pressure-side cleaner applications, and DOE believes that all pumps appropriate for pressure-side pool cleaner applications are currently specifically designed and marketed as such. DOE will continue to monitor the market to ensure that this continues to be the case and that all pumps appropriate for pressure-side pool cleaner applications continue to be characterized as pressure cleaner booster pumps in the future.

In response to the concerns of ASAP, NRDC, and CA IOUs regarding the applicability of the designed and marketed definition to pumps that may be marketed for a variety of applications, in addition to pressure-side pool cleaner applications, DOE agrees with the commenters. Specifically, all pumps designed and marketed for pressure-cleaner booster applications should be treated as pressure cleaner booster pumps, regardless of any other applications for which they may be designed and marketed. DOE acknowledges that the definition of designed and marketed that was presented in the preamble of the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR (81 FR 64580, 64592) was slightly different than that contained in the proposed regulatory text (
Id.
at 64647) and may have created confusion regarding the applicability of the designed and marketed definition. Specifically, in the preamble, DOE discussed defining the term designed and marketed as meaning that the equipment is exclusively designed to fulfill the indicated application and, when distributed in commerce, is designated and marketed solely for that application, with the designation on the packaging and all publicly available documents (
e.g.,
product literature, catalogs, and packaging labels).
Id.
DOE notes that the definition presented in the preamble was incorrect and the definition presented in the regulatory text on page 64647 of the NOPR was the intended definition. DOE believes that the definition contained in the regulatory text, which does not refer to the exclusivity of the design or that the equipment would be solely marketed for a specific purpose, is broader and inclusive of pumps that would be designed and marketed for pressure-side cleaner applications in addition to other applications. However, DOE agrees with ASAP, NRDC, and CA IOUs, that removal of the term “specifically” would help clarify this aspect of the definition. In addition, DOE agrees that changing from “all publicly available documents” to “any publicly available documents” best fulfills the intent of the definition, as any marketing of a pump as a pressure cleaner booster pump would show that the pump is intended to be treated as a pressure cleaner booster pump.

Therefore, DOE is defining the term “designed and marketed” as set forth in the regulatory text of this rule.

5. Storable and Rigid Electric Spa Pumps

In addition to swimming pools, dedicated-purpose pool pumps are also used in spas to circulate and filter the water and operate water jets. Similar to swimming pools, spas can range in size and construction style. Specifically, spas can be portable or permanent installations and can be constructed out of a variety of materials depending on the installation.

Permanent, inground spas are typically constructed similar to small inground pools and use the same pumps (
i.e.,
self-priming pool filter pumps described in section III.B.3.a) to operate the spa. Conversely, for portable spas, a specific-purpose pump is typically distributed in commerce with the portable spa that is specifically designed and marketed for portable electric spa applications only. Such portable electric spa applications can be further differentiated into two general categories: Storable electric spas and rigid electric spas. A storable electric spa refers to an inflatable or otherwise temporary spa that can be collapsed or compacted into a storable unit. In contrast, a rigid electric spa is constructed with rigid, typically more durable, materials and cannot be collapsed or compacted for storage.

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, consistent with the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at p. 3), DOE proposed definitions for “storable electric spa pump” and “rigid electric spa pump” to effectively differentiate them from other varieties of pumps. Specifically, DOE proposed to define “storable electric spa pump” as a pump that is distributed in commerce with one or more of the following: (1) An integral heater and (2) an integral air pump. DOE also proposed to define “rigid electric spa pump” as an end suction pump that does not contain an integrated basket strainer or require a basket strainer for operation as stated in the manufacturer literature provided with the pump, and meets the following three criteria: (1) Is assembled with four through bolts that hold the motor rear endplate, rear bearing, rotor, front bearing, front endplate, and the bare pump together as an integral unit; (2) is constructed with buttress threads at the inlet and discharge of the bare pump; and (3) uses a casing or volute and connections constructed of a non-metallic material. 81 FR 64580, 64592-93 (Sept. 20, 2016).

DOE received no comments negative or positive related to the proposed definitions for storable electric spa pump and rigid electric spa pump. Therefore, DOE is adopting the definitions for these terms as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR.

In addition, DOE notes that the definitions for storable electric spa pump, as well as the definitions for integral cartridge-filter pool pump and integral sand-filter pool pump (see section III.B.3.c), all utilize the term “integral” as part of the definition. In support of these definitions, the DPPP Working Group recommended a definition for integral. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51 Recommendation #4 at p. 7) In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed the definition recommended by the DPPP Working Group and proposed defining the term “integral” as a part of the device that cannot be removed without compromising the device's function or destroying the physical integrity of the unit. 81 FR 64580, 64592-93 (Sept. 20, 2016).

DOE received no comments related to the proposed definition of the term “integral.” Therefore, DOE is adopting the definition for integral as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR.

6. Applicability of Test Procedure Based on Pump Configuration

In addition to specific definitions, the DPPP Working Group also discussed and provided recommendations pertinent to the scope of applicability of the DPPP test procedure. Ultimately, the DPPP Working Group recommended that the scope of the test procedure be limited to only the following specific varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps:

• Self-priming pool filter pumps,

• non-self-priming pool filter pumps,

• waterfall pumps, and

• pressure cleaner booster pumps.

(Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51, Recommendations #1, #2A, and #2B at pp. 1-2; Recommendation #6 at p. 5)

In addition, although not included in the December 2015 DPPP Working Group recommendations, the DPPP Working Group discussed and ultimately recommended not considering a test procedure or standards for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps with a rated hydraulic horsepower
17

greater than 2.5 hp. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 79 at pp. 33-54)

17
See section III.G.1 for a discussion of determination of rated hydraulic horsepower.

The DPPP Working Group also recommended that the test procedure and reporting requirements be applicable to all self-priming pool filter pumps—both those served by single-phase power and those served by three-phase power.
18

(Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82 Recommendations #3 at p. 2) Consistent with the DPPP Working Group recommendations, DOE proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR that the test procedure, sampling requirements, labeling, and related provisions for dedicated-purpose pool pumps apply to all self-priming pool filter pumps and non-self-priming pool filter pumps less than 2.5 rated hydraulic horsepower, as well as waterfall pumps and pressure cleaner booster pumps, regardless of the phase of the supplied power with which they are intended to be used. 81 FR 64580, 64593 (Sept. 20, 2016).

18
The Working Group recommended that the scope of standards for self-priming pool filter pumps only apply to self-priming pool filter pumps served by single-phase power, while the recommended test procedure and reporting requirements would still be applicable to all self-priming pool filter pumps—both those served by single-phase power and those served by three-phase power.

Consistent with the December 2015 DPPP Working Group recommendations, in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE also proposed definitions for rigid-electric and storable-electric spa pumps as a variety of dedicated-purpose pool pump in this test procedure final rule, but DOE did not propose test procedures or reporting requirements for them.

In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE also specifically proposed to exclude submersible pumps from the scope of the DPPP test procedure and proposed defining a “submersible pump” as a pump that is designed to be operated with the motor and bare pump fully submerged in the pumped liquid. 81 FR 64580, 64594 (Sept. 20, 2016).

In written comments, CEC expressed support of DOE's proposal to set the scope of the test procedure rulemaking to include self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps, waterfall pool pumps, and pressure cleaner booster pumps. (CEC, No. 7 at p. 2) DOE appreciates CEC's support.

In response to DOE's proposal regarding the applicability of the proposed test procedure to dedicated-purpose pool pumps served by both single- and three-phase power, Hayward and APSP requested clarification as to the scope of the rule and specifically if it included three-phase dedicated-purpose pool pumps. (Hayward, No. 6 at p. 4; APSP, No. 8 at p. 5) Nidec supported the DPPP Working Group's recommendation that any potential energy conservation standards would only apply to dedicated-purpose pool pumps served by single-phase power. However, Nidec recommended that the test procedure and reporting requirements only apply to dedicated-purpose pool pumps served by single-phase power. Nidec stated that three-

phase motors used with dedicated-purpose pool pumps are very energy efficient and are already regulated. Nidec suggested that three-phase dedicated-purpose pool pumps and related motors should not need further testing nor reporting requirements. (Nidec, No. 10 at p. 3)

In response to Hayward and APSP's request for clarification, DOE clarifies that, as noted previously and discussed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE's proposed test procedure would apply to self-priming pool filter pumps and non-self-priming pool filter pumps less than 2.5 rated hydraulic horsepower, as well as waterfall pumps and pressure cleaner booster pumps, served by both single-phase power or three-phase power. In response to Nidec's comments regarding the applicability of the proposed DOE test procedure to three-phase equipment, DOE believes that the applicability of the DPPP test procedure proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR is consistent with the intent of the DPPP Working Group exhibited in the June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations, where the Working Group recommended that the test procedure and reporting requirements would be applicable to all self-priming pool filter pumps served by single- and three-phase power. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82, Recommendation #3 at p. 2) Although the June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations reference only self-priming pool filter pumps, there is no reason why DOE's proposed DPPP test procedure would not be applicable to other varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps served by single- or three-phase power. In addition, the DPPP Working Group did not recommend restricting the scope of standards for any of the other DPPP varieties based on the phase of power with which it is intended to be used. However, DOE agrees with Nidec that three-phase motors may already be regulated under existing DOE test procedures and energy conservation standards for electric motors and small electric motors. As discussed further in section III.G.1.b, in this final rule, DOE is limiting the test methods for motor horsepower metrics (
i.e.,
DPPP nominal motor horsepower, DPPP service factor, and DPPP motor total horsepower) to single-phase motors because testing and rating of three-phase motors is already regulated by DOE.

DOE agrees that, as stated by Nidec, the applicability of the DPPP test procedure and standards recommended by the DPPP Working Group differ slightly with respect to dedicated-purpose pool pumps that are supplied by single-phase versus three-phase power. Specifically, the DPPP Working Group recommended that the scope of standards for self-priming pool filter pumps only apply to self-priming pool filter pumps served by single-phase power, while the recommended test procedure and reporting requirements would still be applicable to all self-priming pool filter pumps—both those served by single-phase power and those served by three-phase power. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82 Recommendations #3 at p. 2)

In response to the scope of test procedure and metric applicability proposed by DOE in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, Pentair and APSP commented that some form of differentiation or exclusion should be established for dedicated-purpose pool pumps with nominal motor horsepower greater than 3 hp. Pentair suggested that the metric, as proposed in the NOPR, potentially limits a manufacturer's ability to develop an optimal solution for these lower head hydraulic systems, because these pumps are typically applied to pools with larger plumbing and do not typically operate on curve C. Pentair claimed that as a result, these larger pumps will be eliminated from the market. (Pentair, No. 11, at p. 2; APSP, No 8 at pp. 3-4)

As discussed previously in this section, the DPPP Working Group, of which Pentair was a member, recommended that the scope of the test procedure be limited to self- and non-self-priming pool filter pumps, waterfall pumps, and pressure cleaner booster pumps. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 51, Recommendations #1, #2A, and #2B at pp. 1-2; Recommendation #6 at p. 5) In the December 2015 DPPP Working Group recommendations, the DPPP Working Group discussed and ultimately recommended not considering a test procedure or standards for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps with a rated hydraulic horsepower greater than 2.5 hp. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 79 at pp. 33-54) However, the DPPP Working Group did not recommend any other test procedure differentiation or exclusions based on nominal motor horsepower, nor did the DPPP Working Group ask DOE to pursue such action. Therefore, the test procedure and standards recommended by the DPPP Working Group were intended to be applicable to self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps with rated hydraulic horsepower less than or equal to 2.5 hp, which include some pool filter pumps with a nominal motor horsepower greater than 3 hp,
19

which are typically installed into applications with larger plumbing, for which the test procedure would not be representative. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 94 at pp. 38-53; Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 95 at pp. 176-194; Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 79 at pp. 39-40, 47-48) In response to Pentair and APSP, DOE notes that Pentair and APSP did not introduce any new data indicating that the cutoff should actually be a nominal motor horsepower of 3 hp; rather they simply indicated this was due to larger plumbing systems not on curve C, which the Working Group already considered in making its cutoff selection. Finally, the introduction of an exclusion for pumps with greater than 3 nominal motor horsepower opens a significant circumvention loophole risk. For example, manufacturers of pumps with 3 nominal motor horsepower could decide to slightly increase the capacity of the motor (with no change to the bare pump), in order to avoid being subject the test procedure and energy conservation standards. Such a change on nominal horsepower would have little impact on the utility or production cost of such a pump. Alternatively, any change to a pump's hydraulic horsepower rating will directly impact end-user utility (
i.e.,
flow and head). Consequently, DOE reaffirms its conclusion that hydraulic horsepower, rather than motor horsepower, should be used to define the upper scope limit, as hydraulic horsepower is more directly tied to end-user utility (
i.e.,
flow and head) than motor horsepower. For these reasons, DOE is not adopting an alternative scope limitation in this final rule.

19
Nominal motor horsepower is approximately equivalent to the rated hydraulic horsepower divided by the pump efficiency and the motor efficiency of the dedicated-purpose pool pump.

DOE did not receive any other comments regarding the definition of submersible pump, or the general scope of applicability of the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR. Consequently, in this final rule, DOE is adopting test methods for all self-priming pool filter pumps and non-self-priming pool filter pumps less than 2.5 rated hydraulic horsepower, as well as waterfall pumps and pressure cleaner booster pumps, including pumps served by both single- and three-phase power, with the exclusion of submersible pumps. The specific test methods for each of the applicable DPPP varieties are discussed in more detail in section III.D.

7. Definitions Related to Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Speed Configurations and Controls

In addition to definitions of dedicated-purpose pool pump and the specific DPPP varieties, DOE also proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR to establish definitions to further differentiate certain varieties of dedicated-purpose pool pumps, based on the speed configuration of the motor and/or the presence of controls on the DPPP model as distributed in commerce. These definitions are discussed in section III.B.7.a. For dedicated-purpose pool pumps distributed in commerce with applicable pool pump controls, DOE also proposed a definition for “freeze protection controls.” This is discussed in section III.B.7.b.

a. DPPP Speed Configurations

In the June 2016 DPPP Working Group recommendations, the DPPP Working Group recommended definitions for the following DPPP speed configurations: Single-speed, two-speed, multi-speed, and variable-speed. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82, Recommendation #5A at p. 3) In the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed adopting the DPPP Working Group's recommended definitions with a few minor modifications for clarity and consistency. 81 FR 64580, 64594-97 (Sept. 20, 2016). Specifically, DOE proposed the following definitions for single-speed, two-speed, multi-speed, and variable-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump:

•
Single-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump
means a dedicated-purpose pool pump that is capable of operating at only one speed.

•
Two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump
means a dedicated-purpose pool pump that is capable of operating at only two different pre-determined operating speeds, where the low operating speed is less than or equal to half of the maximum operating speed and greater than zero, and must be distributed in commerce either: (1) With a pool pump control (
i.e.,
variable speed drive and user interface or switch) that is capable of changing the speed in response to user preferences; or (2) Without a pool pump control that has the capability to change speed in response to user preferences, but without which the pump is unable to operate without the presence of such a pool pump control.

•
Multi-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump
means a dedicated-purpose pool pump that is capable of operating at more than two discrete pre-determined operating speeds separated by speed increments greater than 100 rpm, where the lowest speed is less than or equal to half of the maximum operating speed and greater than zero, and must be distributed in commerce with an on-board pool pump control (
i.e.,
variable speed drive and user interface or programmable switch) that changes the speed in response to pre-programmed user preferences and allows the user to select the duration of each speed and/or the on/off times.

•
Variable-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump
means a dedicated-purpose pool pump that is capable of operating at a variety of user-determined speeds, where all the speeds are separated by at most 100 rpm increments over the operating range and the lowest operating speed is less than or equal to one-third of the maximum operating speed and greater than zero. Such a pump must include a variable speed drive and be distributed in commerce either: (1) With a user interface that changes the speed in response to pre-programmed user preferences and allows the user to select the duration of each speed and/or the on/off times; or (2) without a user interface but be unable to operate without the presence of a user interface.

81 FR 64580, 64647-48 (Sept. 20, 2016).

DOE's proposed definitions enable each speed configuration to be identified based on (1) the number of operating speeds available to the pump; (2) the minimum operating speed, or turn-down ratio,
20

of the pump; (3) the pump's ability to connect to a pool pump control; and/or (4) the characteristics of that pool pump control. The pool pump control varieties, pool pump control operating characteristics, and requirements regarding the inclusion of pool pump controls applicable to each DPPP speed configuration, as proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR, are summarized in Table III.2.

20
The turn-down ratio for multi-speed pumps, including two-speed pumps, describes the ability of the pump to decrease speed relative to the maximum operating speed and is calculated as the maximum operating speed over the minimum operating speed of the pump.

Table III.2—Summary of Applicable Pool Pump Control Varieties and Related Proposed Requirements for Each DPPP Speed Configuration

DPPP speed configuration
definition

Applicable pool pump control
varieties

Pool pump control must be
pre-programmable

Inclusion of pool pump controls as distributed in commerce

Two-Speed

• Variable speed drive and user interface or
• Switch

No
Included.

Multi-Speed

• Variable speed drive and user interface or
• Switch

Yes
Included and on-board.

Variable-Speed
• Variable speed drive and user interface
Yes
Included or DPPP model cannot operate without being installed with such controls.

CEC, in written comments, supported DOE's proposal to establish definitions for single-speed, two-speed, multi-speed, and variable speed pool filter pumps. (CEC, No. 7 at p. 2) DOE appreciates the support of CEC.

In response to DOE's proposed definitions for two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump, Hayward suggested a modification to the definitional requirement that two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pumps not be able to operate at high speed without the requisite control, instead of not able to operate at all. That is, instead of being unable to operate entirely, two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pumps could be allowed to function at a default low-speed if they are operated without an appropriate pool pump control.

(Hayward, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at pp. 21, 26-27) In response to Hayward's suggestion, CA IOUs stated their support for DOE's originally proposed provision that does not allow a two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump be considered a two-speed pump unless it is unable to operate without an appropriate pool pump control. (CA IOUs, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 3 at p. 26-27)

In response to Hayward's suggestion regarding the definition of two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump, DOE agrees with CA IOUs that the proposed modification is not consistent with the recommendations of the DPPP Working Group. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82, Recommendation #5A at p. 3) The specific wording of the DPPP speed configuration definitions were discussed at length and in significant detail during the DPPP Working Group negotiations and, if fact, were part of the final negotiation of standard levels. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 91 at pp. 141-183; Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 92 at pp. 215-222) Specifically, certain members of the DPPP Working Group voiced concern that if two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pumps were distributed in commerce without any form of control and were capable of being operated without such a control, there would be a significant risk that such pumps would not be paired with an applicable pool pump control in the field and would not achieve the performance and potential energy savings represented by the WEF metric. (Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 91 at pp. 141-183) DOE believes that if a two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump is capable of operating, even at low speed, without an applicable pool pump control, this significantly increases the risk that two-speed pool filter pumps would be installed and operated without an appropriate control. As the two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump test points presume a low flow and high flow test point, the two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump test procedure is only appropriate and representative of two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pumps with controls that enable operation at both speeds. Therefore, to ensure that the test points and resultant WEF metric for two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pumps is representative of actual performance of the equipment in the field, DOE is adopting the definition for two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump proposed in the September 2016 DPPP test procedure NOPR. Furthermore, DOE notes that the two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump definition does not restrict DPPP manufacturers from producing a pump that has two operating speeds and can only be operated at low speed without an appropriate control, as described by Hayward. However, in such a case the pump would not meet the definition of two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump and, therefore, would be tested and subject to standards based on the single-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump test points. See section D.1 for more discussion regarding the specific test points for the different DPPP speed configurations.

In response to DOE's definition of a two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump, Hayward and APSP also requested clarification regarding the meaning of the phrase “unable to operate.” (Hayward, No. 6 at pp. 2; APSP, No. 8 at p. 3) DOE clarifies that the phrase “unable to operate” means that the pump is non-operational and could not be used to circulate water in a pool. That is, the pump is unable to provide any flow or head, and consumes no energy.

Hayward and APSP also requested a better definition of the term “pool pump control.” Hayward and APSP both commented that the two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump definition includes a parenthetical “(
i.e.,
variable speed drive and user interface or switch)” that implies the only two options for a pool pump control are a switch or a variable speed drive and user interface. (Hayward, No. 6 at pp. 2; APSP, No. 8 at p. 3)

DOE recognizes that the use of the abbreviation “
i.e.”
21

was used in error, and may have caused confusion. DOE's intent was to use the abbreviation “
e.g.,”

22

which would signify that a variable speed drive and a user interface or switch were just two examples of possible technologies. That said, the phrase “pool pump control” is not explicitly defined in this final rule and a pool pump control is not limited to the two options used as examples. DOE interprets the phrase “pool pump control” as a general term that encompasses any technology that is capable of changing the speed in response to user preferences. To clarify DOE's original intent, DOE has modified the definition of two-speed dedicated-purpose pool pump to replace “
i.e.”
with “
e.g.”

21
Latin for “id est.” Meaning “that is.”
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/i.e.

22
Latin for “exempli gratia.” Meaning “for example.”
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/e.g.

Similarly, Davey commented that the proposed definition for variable-speed dedicated purpose pool pumps may hinder innovation of pump products that do not require additional controllers. For example, Davey suggested that a dedicated-purpose pool pump, with no pool pump control, but which enables the user to set a duration of operation at high speed and then default to low speed operation might improve efficiency. Davey also noted

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2017-15464. Public record. Not legal advice.