Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver and Publishing of the Petition for Waiver of General Electric Appliances From the DOE Clothes Washer Test Procedure

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

[Case No. CW-004]

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Granting of

the Application for Interim Waiver and Publishing of the Petition for

Waiver of General Electric Appliances From the DOE Clothes Washer Test

Procedure

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

Energy.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Today's notice grants an Interim Waiver to General Electric

Appliances (GEA) and publishes GEA's Petition for Waiver from the

existing Department of Energy (DOE or Department) clothes washer test

procedure regarding wash temperature selections and automatic water

fill capability for its clothes washer model WZSE5310 (Monogram brand).

GEA seeks a waiver because its clothes washer model WZSE5310 has

the following design features that differ from those covered by the

existing DOE clothes washer test procedures: five wash temperatures (a

cold, three warms and a hot) in a primary mode (factory preset), 34

wash temperatures in a secondary programming mode (i.e., a customizing

feature), and a consumer selectable manual or automatic water fill

capability. GEA seeks to test wash temperature selections by averaging

the three warm wash temperatures (warm-hot/cold, warm/cold and warm-

cold/cold) in the primary mode and then applying the existing test

procedure Temperature Use Factors (TUFs) for a three temperature

machine (hot/cold, warm/cold and cold/cold). In regard to consumer

selectable water fill capability, GEA proposes to use the existing test

procedure manual fill provision. DOE is soliciting comments and

information regarding the Petition for Waiver.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information not later than

May 24, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and statements shall be sent to: Department

of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Case No.

CW-004, Mail Stop EE-431, Room 1J-018, Forrestal Building, 1000

Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20585-0121 (202) 586-7140.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

P. Marc LaFrance, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Mail Station EE-431, Forrestal

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121,

(202) 586-8423

Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General

Counsel, Mail Station GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103, (202) 586-9507.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Energy Conservation Program for Consumer

Products (other than automobiles) was established pursuant to the

Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), 42 USC 6291 et

seq., which requires DOE to prescribe standardized test procedures to

measure the energy consumption of certain consumer products, including

clothes washers. The intent of the test procedures is to provide a

comparable measure of energy consumption that will assist consumers in

making purchasing decisions. These test procedures appear at Title 10

CFR Part 430, Subpart B.

DOE amended the test procedure rules to provide for a waiver

process by adding Sec. 430.27 to Title 10, CFR Part 430. (45 FR 64108,

September 26, 1980). Thereafter, DOE further amended the appliance test

procedure waiver process to allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) to grant an

Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that

have petitioned DOE for a waiver from such prescribed test procedures.

(51 FR 42823, November 26, 1986).

The waiver process allows the Assistant Secretary to temporarily

waive the test procedures for a particular basic

[[Page 18126]]

model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more

design characteristics which prevent testing according to the

prescribed test procedures or when the prescribed test procedures may

evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true

energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative

data. Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure

amendments become effective, resolving the problem that is the subject

of the waiver.

The Interim Waiver provisions, added by the 1986 amendment, allow

the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver when it is

determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the

Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the

Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary

determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to

grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for

Waiver. An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or

until DOE issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver,

whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if

necessary.

On October 9, 1995, GEA filed a Petition for Waiver and an

Application for Interim Waiver regarding its clothes washer model

WZSE5310. The design features that differ from those covered by the

existing clothes washer test procedure are: Five wash temperatures (a

cold, three warms and a hot) in a factory preset primary mode, 34 wash

temperature selections in a secondary programming mode which may be

substituted for the factory preset temperatures, and a consumer

activated choice of a manual or automatic water fill capability.

GEA proposed testing either the higher of the factory preset

temperature selection or the mean of the adjustable range of the

secondary programming mode temperature selections. This results in GEA

seeking to test the wash temperature selections by averaging the warm

wash temperatures in the primary (factory preset) mode and then

applying the Temperature Use Factors (TUFs) for a three temperature

machine (hot/cold, warm/cold and cold/cold) found in the existing test

procedure at Section 5.3 of Appendix J to Subpart B. In regard to

consumer selectable water fill capability, GEA proposes to use the

existing test procedure manual fill provision.

Discussion of Comments

Wash Temperature Selections

The Department received comments about the GEA Interim Waiver

Application and Petition for Waiver request from Asko Inc. (ASKO),

Maytag and Admiral Products (Maytag), Speed Queen Company (Speed

Queen), Whirlpool Corporation (Whirlpool) and White Consolidated

Industries, Inc. (White Consolidated).1 All commenters opposed

GEA's proposed method to test the higher of the factory preset or the

mean of the secondary programming mode temperature selection range. All

commenters believed that the hottest setting available in the secondary

programming mode (126 deg.F) should be tested in lieu of the hottest

setting available at the factory preset (120 deg.F) for hot.

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

1 Comments are available upon request at the address

provided at the beginning of today's notice.

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

Some commenters proposed various methods on how to test the GEA

clothes washer. Maytag believed the hottest settings available in the

secondary programming mode should be tested and the warm wash

temperatures averaged. Speed Queen believed that the clothes washer

should be tested in the factory preset mode and in the secondary

programming mode (hottest settings available), and then new TUFs should

be applied to the two modes. Whirlpool believed that the Association of

Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) proposed test procedure 2

should be directly applied to the secondary programming mode, thus the

hottest setting available and coldest setting available would be

tested, along with the testing and averaging of all warm wash

(intermediate) temperatures. White Consolidated believed that the AHAM

test procedure should not be applied, that the hottest hot, hottest

cold and either hottest middle warm or hottest higher warm of the

secondary programming mode should be tested (it was unclear to the

Department which one was being recommended).

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

2 On March 23, 1995, DOE published a proposed rule to

amend the clothes washer test procedure. (56 FR 15330). In response

to the Department's Proposed Rule, AHAM proposed a new test

procedure to become effective concurrently with the anticipated

future clothes washer standards. The Department supports AHAM's

effort in developing a new test procedure and will address issues

regarding that test procedure under the appropriate rulemaking

(Docket No. EE-RM-94-230). Although a number of comments reference

the proposed AHAM test procedures, the Department does not believe

that it can be used to establish testing procedures for issues

covered by the existing test procedures. If the issues are not

covered by the existing test procedure, then the AHAM proposed test

procedure may have merit.

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

GEA provided a rebuttal comment that the current test procedure

requires the testing of the ``hottest setting available'' and states

that ``the only `setting' on the new Monogram machine is the main

temperature selection pads on the control panel. This use of the term

`setting' is its normal and conventional meaning.'' GEA believed that

there is no basis to test in the secondary programming mode and that

Australian survey data indicates that the secondary programming mode is

used only six percent of the time. GEA continued to say that its

original proposal is preferable, but if the AHAM test procedure were to

be applied to the secondary programming mode, then it believes new TUFs

should be allowed.

The Department believes that the ``hottest setting available''

refers to available on the clothes washer and not any particular mode

of a clothes washer because the rule language (Section 3.2.2.2) clearly

states ``For automatic clothes washers set the wash/rinse temperature

selector to the hottest setting available (hot/warm).'' Based on the

information and comments available, if the existing test procedure is

applied to the GEA clothes washer, the Department believes that the

hottest setting available on the clothes washer should be tested for

the hot setting. Furthermore, the Department believes this philosophy

should be extended to the warm and cold wash temperature settings

because this is the industry's basic interpretation 3 of the test

procedure.

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

3 Manufacturers have voluntarily made this interpretation

for temperature selections other than hot. The Department is aware

of at least one manufacturer who has tested the hottest of a

similarly labeled temperature selection (i.e. auto cold/cold 70/80

deg.F was tested in lieu of cold/cold 60 deg.F).

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

Concerning GEA's two intermediate warm temperatures [one warm

temperature which is equally hotter than the median warm (warm-hot/

cold) and one which is equally colder than the median warm (warm-cold/

cold)], the Department believes that these temperature selections do

not have to be tested. The Department believes that consumers are just

as likely to choose the hotter warm (warm-hot/cold) as they are to

choose the cooler warm (warm-cold/cold). This position has been

supported by White Consolidated. Furthermore, on November 24, 1992, the

Department rejected a Petition for Waiver from Maytag which had a

clothes washer with intermediate warm temperatures (half hot and half

warm; and half warm and half cold) and indicated that it ``could be

tested using the existing test procedure by neglecting the intermediate

temperature settings.'' The Department also acknowledges that

[[Page 18127]]

this approach will be equivalent to averaging all three warm wash

temperature selections, but it will reduce the test burden. Therefore,

today's Interim Waiver being granted to GEA requires that the hottest

setting available of the hot/cold (126 deg.F), warm/cold (101 deg.F)

and cold/cold (66 deg.F) temperature selections be tested in the

secondary programming mode. The Department requests comments about the

test method provided to GEA in the Interim Waiver and recommendations

for alternatives, if appropriate, considering today's publication.

Automatic Water Fill Capability

GEA did not request a waiver from the existing test procedure to

test its automatic water fill capability feature. However, Asko,

Maytag, Speed Queen and Whirlpool had concerns about this feature.

Maytag believed that testing in the manual mode is acceptable, as long

as all rinse cycles are cold because due to the clothes washer sensing

capability, additional rinse water may be added. Asko, Speed Queen and

Whirlpool believed that the automatic water fill capability should be

tested primarily because they believe that GEA will market the energy

saving potential of the automatic water fill capability. In addition,

Asko indicated that the automatic water fill feature may use more

energy than the manual fill mode. Speed Queen and Whirlpool believed

that the AHAM proposed test procedure should be used for the testing.

GEA rebutted that the existing test procedure requires the minimum

and maximum fill settings be tested and that its machine can be tested

in the manual mode with the minimum and maximum settings and a waiver

was not required.

The Department agrees with GEA that its clothes washer can be

tested with the existing test procedure regarding water fill. However,

a second requirement for a Waiver is whether a test procedure evaluates

a basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy

consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data.

Therefore, the issues regarding GEA's clothes washer raised by the

commenters have merit. GEA has stated to the Department that when

applying the existing test procedure test loads and minimum and maximum

usage fill factors its clothes washer uses less energy when the

automatic water fill mode (as preset from the factory) is used versus

the manual mode. However, the ``sensitivity'' or relative fill amounts

of the automatic water fill mode can be reprogrammed in the secondary

programming mode, thus resulting in an increase in energy consumption

above the manual mode result.

The Department believes that the GEA clothes washer should be

tested to capture both the automatic water fill mode and the manual

water fill mode since both options are available to the consumer. This

can be achieved by testing and averaging the two. This is consistent

with the Department's historical position when actual consumer usage

habits have not been known.4 However, the programmability of the

automatic water fill capability presents some difficulties. First, the

Department believes that the most energy intensive mode of the

automatic fill capability should be tested because this option is

available to the consumer through secondary programming. However, on

the other hand, to only test the most energy intensive mode of

automatic fill capability which is more energy intensive than the

factory preset, does not appear to be entirely fair because the

consumer may also choose to set the automatic water fill mode to a

lower, or less energy intensive mode than the factory preset.

Therefore, on an interim basis until additional comments and hopefully

statistically significant data can be provided, the Department believes

that averaging of the least energy intensive and most energy intensive

modes for automatic water fill capability is the best method to use to

determine the energy use in the automatic water fill mode. This result

shall then be averaged with the test result from the primary manual

water fill mode. The Department requests comments on this test method

and submission of statistically significant consumer usage data, if

available.

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

4 For example, the dishwasher test procedure uses a 50

percent usage factor for unheated dry option. (42 FR 15423, March

17, 1977).

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

Test Loads/Usage Factors

With regard to activating the automatic water fill capability,

Whirlpool stated that GEA should use the test loads specified in the

AHAM proposed test procedure. The AHAM proposed test procedure

specifies larger test loads which more accurately reflects actual

consumer usage habits and requires additional testing for ``average''

size loads. The Department does not agree with Whirlpool because

presently one manufacturer, Asko, has been granted a Waiver (59 FR

15719, April 4, 1994) for its clothes washers with automatic water fill

capability that uses the existing test procedure test loads to activate

the maximum and minimum fills and uses the existing test procedure

usage fill factors. Imposing larger test loads on GEA and requiring

additional testing would put GEA at a competitive disadvantage because

its competitors are allowed to use the requirements of the existing

test procedure. Therefore, the Interim Waiver granted to GEA today uses

a 3 pound test load to activate the minimum fill test with the current

0.28 usage fill factor, and a 7 pound test load to activate the maximum

fill test with the current 0.72 usage fill factor. In addition, the

Department has used the AHAM proposed rule language, where warranted.

For example, the term ``adaptive water fill control system'' was used

in lieu of ``automatic water fill capability.''

Warm Rinses

Maytag and Speed Queen expressed concerns about the GEA machine

possibly having warm rinses. Speed Queen indicated that although GEA

stated that the normal cycle did not have a warm rinse, it was

concerned about other cycles possibly having warm rinses. Speed Queen

referenced the Department's rulemaking regarding normal cycle

temperature selection lockouts (Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products, Docket No. EE-RM-93-701) and indicated that if a

warm rinse was available, then it should be handled similarly to that

rulemaking. Maytag was concerned about possible additional hot water

use for a warm rinse during an automatic water fill function. The

Department has learned that GEA's clothes washer does have a warm rinse

in the wool cycle. Presently, the test procedure does not allow for

testing of temperature selections in non- normal cycles, so GEA is not

required to test it. However, when the rulemaking for the normal cycle

temperature selection lockout (Docket No. EE-RM-93-701) is finalized,

it is likely that the requirements of that rule will require GEA and

other manufacturers to test warm rinses in cycles other than the normal

cycle.

Justification

(a) Economic Hardship

GEA stated that it currently did not have a Monogram brand product

in its home laundry line. GEA indicated that delay of the introduction

of its clothes washer would also impact the introduction of its

Monogram dryer.

Asko, Whirlpool and White Consolidated all provided comments about

the justification GEA provided to support its Application for Interim

Waiver. In regard to economic hardship, they all basically provided

comments that GEA did not demonstrate economic

[[Page 18128]]

hardship. GEA rebutted indicating that the requirements of 10 CFR, Part

430, Sec. 430.27(g) state that an Interim Waiver be granted if the

applicant will experience economic hardship, or if it appears likely

that the waiver will be granted, or if the waiver is desirable for

public policy reasons. GEA did not provide specific rebuttal relative

to economic hardship.

The Department agrees with Asko, Whirlpool and White Consolidated

that GEA did not demonstrate economic hardship. The failure to sell a

particular clothes washer and/or clothes dryer for a corporation the

size of GEA would most likely not result in economic hardship. However,

if this were to be considered further, GEA would have to provide

specific data to justify that failure to sell its clothes washer would

demonstrate economic hardship.

(b) Likely Approval of the Petition for Waiver

GEA indicated that the Petition for Waiver was likely to be granted

because the GEA proposed test procedure conforms, as much as possible,

with the industry supported AHAM proposed test procedure. Asko

disagreed with GEA's assertion that its petition conforms with the AHAM

proposed test procedure. Asko believed that GEA should conduct field

testing per the provisions of the proposed AHAM test procedure.

The Department believes that it is likely that the Petition for

Waiver (with possible modification) will be granted to GEA because its

clothes washer has features that cannot be tested per the existing test

procedure. Furthermore, if the features of the GEA clothes washer were

not tested, then the test results of the GEA clothes washer may be

materially unrepresentative of its true energy consumption. The

availability of 34 wash temperature selections is different than

traditional clothes washers, although the basic technology is not

novel; an acceptable test procedure can be developed for it. The

Department has addressed the technical issues, i.e., wash temperature

selections, automatic water fill capability, test loads, and warm

rinse, raised by commenters in the Interim Waiver being granted to GEA

today.

Also, the Department has previously granted a Waiver to another

manufacturer (Asko, as indicated above) regarding automatic water fill

capability. Thus, it is likely that the Petition for Waiver will be

granted to GEA. Although the Department has concerns about the

secondary programming mode for automatic water fill capability, the

Department is requiring testing of the most and least energy intensive

condition until data and/or additional comment is received.

With regard to field testing, presently no requirement exists.

However, the Department would support that effort, if it resulted in

the gathering of statistically significant usage data for automatic

water fill capability and the use of the secondary programming mode.

The Department does acknowledge that if, in the future, a Waiver is

granted to GEA, it could be changed significantly from today's Interim

Waiver based on public comment or statistically significant consumer

usage data, if submitted.

(c) Public Policy

GEA indicated that its clothes washer was equipped with high spin

speed, up to 1000 revolutions per minute (RPM), which results in

significant energy savings in the dryer. GEA also indicated that its

clothes washer has automatic water fill capability which is anticipated

to save energy in a consumer's home.

Asko stated that the GEA product is not revolutionary. Asko also

stated that GEA's claim in its Petition is inconsistent with the GEA

position presented publicly to DOE. (DOE hearing on July 12, 1995, for

Docket No. EE-RM-94-230). Asko's concern is that GEA argued to DOE that

remaining moisture content (RMC) should have no bearing on energy use

or energy credits. Whirlpool believed GEA failed to provide a basis

that its clothes washer will save energy. Furthermore, Whirlpool

believed that until such time the test procedure and standards address

reduced RMC, it should not be considered for granting the Petition.

GEA provided rebuttal, and stated that although it ``argued that a

clothes washer energy efficiency standard based on a mandatory RMC

requirement is inappropriate, it has consistently supported the energy

savings benefits of reduced RMC.'' (GEA rebuttal comment of November 9,

1995, page 4). GEA also indicated that its clothes washer will achieve

RMC levels of less than 40 percent which would result in approximately

$20/year savings versus a clothes washer with 62 percent RMC.

The Department believes that the GEA clothes washer offers

technology that has the possibility of saving significant amounts of

energy. The Administration is committed to promoting energy efficient

technologies, such as, clothes washers with automatic water fill

capability and high spin speed. The Department has estimated that a

clothes washer with 40 percent RMC will save approximately $15/year for

consumers (weighted between gas and electric dryers) or approximately

40 percent of the cost to run their dryers versus a clothes washer with

62 percent RMC.\5\ Although RMC provisions are not reflected in the

current test procedure,\6\ the Department promotes energy efficiency

improvements for consumer products. In addition, the GEA clothes washer

is a vertical-axis clothes washer which has a RMC level below 40

percent. The Department is not aware of any vertical-axis clothes

washer with that low level of RMC. With regard to automatic water fill

capability, the laundry industry has submitted shipment weighted

average data to the Department indicating that the automatic water fill

feature would save approximately 11 percent of the energy consumed in a

clothes washer.\7\

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

\5\ See the Department's preliminary Engineering Analysis,

comment 40 on Docket No. EE-RM-94-403. Also, 62 percent RMC

represents the current industry shipment weighted average for

clothes washers.

\6\ The Department has proposed this, see Docket No. EE-RM-94-

230.

\7\ See AHAM comment No. 38, Docket No. EE-RM-94-403.

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

Whirlpool expressed a concern that the GEA clothes washer may not

meet the minimum energy conservation standard.\8\ GEA rebutted that if

its clothes washer were tested per its submitted Application, then it

would exceed the minimum energy conservation standard. GEA is required

to certify with the Department that its clothes washer meets the

standard before it distributes the machine in commerce.

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

\8\ The Department has imposed minimum energy conservation

standards for consumer products (see 10 CFR, Part 430, Section

430.32). The Department is also presently reviewing the clothes

washers standards to determine if they need to be more stringent

(see Docket No. EE-RM-94-403).

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

Therefore, based on the likely approval of the Petition for Waiver

and for public policy reasons, the Department grants GEA an Interim

Waiver from the DOE test procedures for its clothes washer model

WZSE5310. GEA shall be permitted to test its clothes washer on the

basis of the test procedures specified in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B,

Appendix J, with the following modifications:

(i) Add new sections, 1.19 through 1.21 in Appendix J to read as

follows:

1.19 ``Adaptive water fill control system'' refers to a clothes

washer water fill control system which is capable of automatically

adjusting the water fill level based on the size or weight of the test

load placed in the clothes container, without allowing or requiring

consumer intervention and/or actions.

1.20 ``Manual water fill control system'' refers to a clothes

washer water

[[Page 18129]]

fill control system which requires the consumer to determine or select

the water fill level.

1.21 ``Secondary programming mode'' means an auxiliary function

used to adjust temperature, water level, rinse options or other

characteristics of the machine. The user must not be able to access

these adjustments from the normal operating mode of the machine, and

access to the secondary mode must not be necessary to operate the

machine.

(ii) Section 2.8 through 2.8.2.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and

replaced with the following:

2.8 Use of test loads.

2.8.1 Top-loader-vertical-axis clothes. The top-loader clothes

washer shall be tested without a test load, except for clothes washers

equipped with an adaptive water fill control system. Clothes washers

equipped with an adaptive water fill control system shall use a test

load per section 2.8.2.

2.8.2 Front-loader and top-loader-vertical-axis with an adaptive

water fill control system, clothes washers.

2.8.2.1 Standard size clothes washer. When the maximum water fill

level is being tested, the test load shall be seven pounds as described

in section 2.7.1. When the minimum water fill level is being tested,

the test load shall be three pounds as described in section 2.7.2.

2.8.2.2 Compact size clothes washer. When either the maximum or

minimum water fill levels are being tested, the test load shall be as

described in section 2.7.2.

(iii) Section 3.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with

the following:

3.2 Test cycle. Establish the test conditions set forth in 2 of

this Appendix. For clothes washers with both an adaptive water fill

control system and a manual water fill control system, test both the

manual and adaptive modes. Additionally, for clothes washers equipped

with more than one adaptive water fill control selection, including

clothes washers with secondary programming modes, test the selection

that will result in the maximum energy consumption and the selection

that will result in the minimum energy consumption.

(iv) Section 3.2.2.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced

with the following:

3.2.2.2 For automatic clothes washers, set the wash/rinse

temperature selector to the hottest setting available (hot/warm),

including a secondary programming mode.

(v) Section 3.2.2.6 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced

with the following:

3.2.2.6 For automatic clothes washers repeat sections 3.2.2.3,

3.2.2.4, and 3.2.2.5 for each of the other wash/rinse temperature

selections available that use hot water, including a secondary

programming mode. For clothes washers with multiple warm wash

temperature selections, test only the median warm wash setting at the

hottest temperature available. For clothes washers that have a cold

wash which uses hot water, test using the hottest temperature

available.

(vi) Section 4.1 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with

the following:

4.1 Per-cycle temperature-weighted hot water consumption for

maximum and minimum water fill levels. For the manual water fill and

the adaptive water fill (the maximum energy consumption adaptive water

fill and the minimum energy consumption adaptive water fill, if

needed), calculate for the cycle under test the per-cycle temperature

weighted hot water consumption for the maximum water fill level,

Vmax, and for the minimum water fill level, Vmin, expressed

in gallons per cycle and defined as:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.000

where:

Vi=reported hot water consumption in gallons per cycle at maximum

fill for each wash/rinse TUF combination setting, as provided in

section 3.2.2.

TUFi=applicable temperature use factor in section 5 or 6.

n=number of wash/rinse TUF combination setting available to the user

for the clothes washer under test.

TUFw=temperature use factor for warm wash setting.

For clothes washers equipped with the suds-saver feature:

X1=frequency of use without the suds-saver feature=0.86.

X2=frequency of use with the suds-saver feature=0.14.

ShH=fresh make-up water measured during suds-return cycle at

maximum water fill level.

For clothes washers not equipped with the suds-saver feature:

X1=1.0

X2=0.0

and

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.002

where:

Vj=reported hot water consumption in gallons per cycle at minimum

fill for each wash/rinse TUF combination setting, as provided in

section 3.3.3.

TUFj=applicable temperature use factor in section 5 or 6.

[[Page 18130]]

ShL=fresh hot make-up water measured during suds-return cycle at

minimum water fill level.

n=as defined above.

TUFw=as defined above.

X1=as defined above.

X2=as defined above.

For clothes washers that have more than one adaptive water fill

control selection, the (Vmax) adaptive (s) and (Vmin)

adaptive (s) calculated for the maximum and the minimum energy

consumption tests shall be averaged respectively, to report a single

(Vmax) adaptive and (Vmin) adaptive to be used in

4.2 for additional calculations.

(vii) Section 4.2 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with

the following:

4.2 Total per-cycle hot water energy consumption for maximum and

minimum water fill levels. Calculate the total per-cycle hot water

energy consumption for the maximum water fill level, Emax, and for

the minimum water level, Emin, for both the manual and adaptive

fills, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle, as follows:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.003

where,

MF=Multiplying factor to account for the absence of a test load=0.94

for top-loader clothes washers that are sensor filled, 1.0 for top

loader clothes washers that are time-filled, 1.0 for all front-loader

clothes washers, and 1.0 for adaptive fill tests.

T=Temperature rise=90 deg.F.

K=Water specific heat in kilowatt-hours per gallon degree F=0.0024.

(Vmax) manual , (Vmax) adaptive=As defined in

section 4.1.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.004

and

where,

MF=As defined above.

T=As defined above.

K=As defined above.

(Vmin) manual , (Vmin) adaptive=As defined in

section 4.1.

(viii) Section 4.4 in Appendix J shall be deleted and replaced with

the following:

4.4 Per-cycle machine electrical energy consumption. The values

recorded in section 3.3.1 are the per-cycle machine electrical energy

consumptions; ME manual, for a manual water fill control system;

ME adaptive, for an adaptive water fill control system; expressed

in kilowatt-hours per cycle. The following equation shall be used to

calculate the per-cycle machine electrical energy consumption, ME,

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24AP96.005

For clothes washers that have more than one adaptive water fill

control selection, the ME adaptive (s) reported for the maximum

and the minimum energy consumption tests shall be averaged to report a

single ME adaptive for the above equation.

This Interim Waiver is based upon the presumed validity of

statements and all allegations submitted by GEA Appliances Inc. This

Interim Waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a

determination that the factual basis underlying the Application is

incorrect.

The Interim Waiver shall remain in effect for a period of 180 days,

or until the Department acts on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is

sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180-day period, if

necessary.

Pursuant to paragraph (b) of Title 10 CFR 430.27, DOE is hereby

publishing the ``Petition for Waiver'' in its entirety. The Petition

contains no confidential information. DOE would appreciate comments,

data and other information regarding the Petition, discussed above.

Issued in Washington, DC April 4, 1996.

Christine A. Ervin,

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

October 9, 1995.

Assistant Secretary,

Conservation and Renewable Energy, United States Department of

Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW.,

Washington, DC 20585

RE: Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver, Appendix

J, Subpart B CFR part 430, Test Method for Clothes Washers with no

Applicable Temperature Usage Factor

Dear Assistant Secretary: This Application for Interim Waiver

and Petition for Waiver is submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27,

which provides for a modification of the required test method

because of design characteristics preventing testing or producing

data unrepresentative of a covered product's true energy consumption

characteristics.

GE Appliances (GEA) is sourcing its top of the line, Monogram

Brand, washer from Fisher & Paykel Industries Limited, New Zealand.

The model number is WZSE5310. This product has innovative design

characteristics which prevent testing it in strict accordance to the

existing Appendix J test method. These design characteristics are:

--Five temperature selections in the primary wash mode including

hot, warm-hot, warm, warm-cold and cold wash--all with a cold rinse.

This product does not have water heating capability and achieves the

five temperatures by adjustment of the hot/cold mix ratio. A warm

rinse option is not available in the normal cycle.

--A secondary programming mode which the consumer can access to

adjust the factory preset temperatures of the five settings in the

primary wash mode. In all, the consumer has a choice of 34 wash

temperatures.

[[Page 18131]]

Adjustment Temperatures (F)

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

Factory

Preset

Wash temp. setting (except

cold

setting)

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

Hot............................................. 112 114 116 118 120 122 124 126

Warm-hot........................................ 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 111

Warm............................................ 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101

Warm-cold....................................... 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91

Cold:

Cold water only*............................ 54 56 58 60 62 64 66

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

* Factory Preset for COLD setting.

This request for waiver is submitted because (1) The combination

of five pre-set temperature selections--all with a cold water

rinse--are incompatible with any of the TUF tables in Section 4 of

the regulations; and (2) the requirement of section 3.2.2.6 that we

test all temperature selections that use hot water is unduly

burdensome. Instead, we propose modified regulations that will allow

for a conservative testing protocol appropriate to this product that

is also in accordance with the negotiated AHAM proposed rule.

GEA proposes an Interim Waiver and Waiver to allow testing of

the machine per Appendix J with the following modifications:

Add the following definition to the test procedure:

1.19 ``Secondary programming mode'' means an auxiliary function

used to adjust temperature, water level, rinse options or other

characteristics of the machine. The user must not be able to access

these adjustments from the normal operating mode of the machine, and

access to the secondary mode must not be necessary to operate the

machine.

Change section 3.2.2.6 of the test procedure as follows:

3.2.2.6 For automatic clothes washers repeat 3.2.2.3, 3.2.2.4,

and 3.2.2.5 for each of the other wash/rinse temperature selections

available that use hot water except: 1) if wash temperature

selections are uniformly distributed, by temperature, between ``hot

wash'' and ``cold wash'', the reportable values to be used for the

warm water wash setting shall be the arithmetic average of hot and

cold selections measurements of 2) if wash temperature selections

are non-uniformly distributed, by temperature, between ``hot wash''

and ``cold wash'', test all intermediate wash temperature selections

and average the results to obtain the reportable warm wash values.

For semi-automatic clothes washers. . .

For model WZSE5310 this would mean using Alternate II from the

three temperature selection TUF table, section 5.3 of Appendix J

Hot/Cold, Warm/Cold, Cold/Cold, and using the average of the three

warm settings on the machine for Warm/Cold. This also conforms with

the new test procedure proposed by AHAM section 3.5.1. (The warm

setting is the default wash temperature for all cycles.)

Change section 3.5 of the test procedure as follows:

3.5.2.1 If the wash temperature offered in the normal operating

mode of the machine can be further adjusted in a secondary

programming mode, the higher of the factory preset temperature or

the mean of the adjustable range shall be used for testing.

For model WZSE5310 this means using the factory preset

temperatures for the Hot and Warm settings and 60F for the Cold

setting for testing.

The table above shows the possible temperature settings for the

machine (approximate bath water temperatures). To achieve the

temperatures to the right and left of the factory preset

temperatures on the table, the user must read the owners' guide to

learn how to enter a secondary programming mode and make a special

effort to enter this mode and change the temperatures. We feel

strongly that this secondary programming mode will be used very

infrequently because an Australia consumer survey of 202 users

showed that only about 6% of those consumers ever entered this mode

to adjust temperatures. There is no U.S. consumer data showing how

many consumers will enter the secondary programming mode and the

frequency that the consumers will adjust the temperatures. Lacking

this data, it is logical to assume that if consumers make the effort

to enter the secondary mode, it is equally or more likely that the

consumer will adjust the temperature down, saving energy, as it is

that the consumer will raise the temperature. This is especially

true since there are 4 downward adjustments and only 3 upward

adjustments possible. The owners' guide will also inform the

consumer that adjusting the temperature downward will save energy.

Thus, we believe that the most representative wash temperatures are

the factory preset temperatures.

GEA requests immediate relief by grant of the proposed Interim

Waiver, justified by the following reasons:

Economic Hardship--GEA currently has no Monogram brand product

in its home laundry product line. Delay of introduction of the this

product will not allow GE to complete its product line. Since a

Monogram dryer will be introduced with this product, its

introduction would also be delayed.

Likely Approval of Waiver--The Petition for Waiver is likely to

be granted because the test procedure proposed conforms as much as

possible with the new test procedure supported by AHAM. This new

AHAM test procedure is likely to be adopted.

Public Policy Merits-GE's Monogram washers are designed to

efficiently extract more water from wet clothes by a high speed spin

cycle, up to 1000 RPM. Such water extraction is many times more

energy efficient than drying the same amount of water. This

innovation in clothes washer design does not affect the test method

for clothes washers, but does result in increased total energy

savings. GE's new washer is also factory preset to an auto water

fill level. The machine senses the clothes load and uses only the

amount of water necessary to clean the clothes. Because a manual

High/Medium/Low water fill level is also available, we will test the

machine using the manual water levels per the test procedure.

However, the auto water fill feature is expected to show actual

energy savings for the consumer.

Thank you for considering this petition.

Lee Bishop,

Senior Counsel Product Safety/Regulatory.

Jane Ransdell,

Energy Standards Engineer.

[FR Doc. 96-9950 Filed 4-23-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P