Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Refrigerated Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines, 45757-45800 [2015-17967]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Vol. 80
Friday,
No. 147
July 31, 2015
Part III
Department of Energy
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Refrigerated Bottled or
Canned Beverage Vending Machines; Final Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45758
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–TP–0045]
RIN 1904–AD07
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedure for Refrigerated Bottled or
Canned Beverage Vending Machines
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
On August 11, 2014, the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) issued a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR)
to amend the test procedure for
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines (beverage vending
machines or BVMs). That proposed
rulemaking serves as the basis for the
final rule. In this final rule, DOE is
reorganizing its test procedure for
beverage vending machines into an
Appendix A, which will be mandatory
for equipment testing beginning 180
days after the final rule is published in
the Federal Register, and an Appendix
B, which will be mandatory for
equipment testing to demonstrate
compliance with any amended energy
conservation standards arising out of
DOE’s ongoing BVM energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
Specifically, Appendix A includes
amendments that update the referenced
test method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010, eliminate the requirement to
test at the 90 °F ambient test condition,
establish a provision for testing at the
lowest application product temperature,
and adopt several amendments and
clarifications to the DOE test procedure
to improve the repeatability and remove
ambiguity from the current BVM test
procedure, as established by DOE in the
2006 BVM test procedure final rule.
Appendix B contains all the
amendments included in Appendix A
and, in addition, incorporates
provisions to account for the impact of
low power modes on measured daily
energy consumption (DEC). Finally,
DOE is adopting in this final rule
several clarifications regarding the
certification and reporting requirements
for beverage vending machines.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is
August 31, 2015. Compliance with
Appendix A to subpart Q of 10 CFR part
431 will be mandatory for
representations made on or after January
27, 2016. Compliance with Appendix B
to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 will be
mandatory for representations made on
or after the compliance date of any
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
amended energy conservation
standards. (Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–
STD–0022). DOE will publish a
document in the Federal Register
announcing the compliance date for
Appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part
431. The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in this rule
was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register as of August 31, 2015.
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 regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the 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://www1.eere.energy.gov/
buildings/appliance_standards/
product.aspx/productid/24. This Web
page will contain a link to the docket for
this document on the regulations.gov
site. The regulations.gov 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 Ms. Brenda
Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by email:
Brenda.Edwards@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:
refrigerated_beverage_vending_
machines@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–1777, Email:
Sarah.Butler@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final
rule incorporates by reference into 10
CFR part 431 the testing methods
contained in the following commercial
standards:
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–
2010, ‘‘Methods of Testing for Rating
Vending Machines for Sealed
Beverages,’’ approved July 23, 2010.
Copies of ASHRAE standards may be
purchased from the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers; 1791 Tullie
Circle NE., Atlanta, GA 30329, 404–
636–8400, or www.ashrae.org.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
See section IV.N. for additional
information on this standard.
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Appendix A: Clarifications and
Amendments to the DOE Test Procedure
1. Updating the Referenced Test Method
2. Other Minor Clarifications and
Amendments to ASHRAE 32.1–2010
3. Eliminating Testing at the 90 °F Ambient
Test Condition
4. Test Procedure for Combination Vending
Machines
5. Loading of BVM Models When
Conducting the DOE Test Procedure
6. Specifying the Characteristics of the
Standard Product
7. Clarifying the Next-To-Vend Beverage
Temperature Test Condition
8. Defining ‘‘Fully Cooled’’
9. Placement of Thermocouples During
Testing
10. Establishing Testing Provisions at the
Lowest Application Product
Temperature
11. Treatment of Certain Accessories
During Testing
B. Appendix B: Summary of the Test
Procedure Revisions To Account for Low
Power Modes
1. Definitions Related to the Low Power
Mode Test Procedure
2. Low Power Mode Test Method
3. Refrigeration Low Power Mode
Verification Test Protocol
C. Other Amendments and Clarifications
1. Clarifications to the Scope of the BVM
Regulations
2. Clarifications to Certification and
Reporting Requirements
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal
Energy Administration Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
N. Description of Standards Incorporated
by Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
I. Authority and Background
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Authority
Title III, Part B 1 of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975 (‘‘EPCA’’
or ‘‘the Act’’), Public Law 94–163 (42
U.S.C. 6291–6309, as codified)
established the ‘‘Energy Conservation
Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles.’’ 2 These include
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines (‘‘beverage vending
machines’’ or BVMs), the subject of this
document. (42 U.S.C. 6295(v)) 3
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 Secretary or the Federal
Trade Commission, as appropriate, may
prescribe labeling requirements for
beverage vending machines. (42 U.S.C.
6294(a)(5)(A)) 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.
1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A.
2 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).
3 Because Congress included beverage vending
machines in Part A of Title III of EPCA, the
consumer product provisions of Part A (not the
industrial equipment provisions of Part A–1) apply
to beverage vending machines. DOE placed the
regulatory requirements specific to beverage
vending machines in Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), part 431, ‘‘Energy Efficiency
Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial
Equipment’’ as a matter of administrative
convenience based on their type and will refer to
beverage vending machines as ‘‘equipment’’
throughout this document because of their
placement in 10 CFR part 431. Despite the
placement of beverage vending machines in 10 CFR
part 431, the relevant provisions of Title A of EPCA
and 10 CFR part 430, which are applicable to all
product types specified in Title A of EPCA, are
applicable to beverage vending machines. See 74 FR
44914, 44917 (Aug. 31, 2009). In this test procedure
final rule, DOE is clarifying the relevant authority
for beverage vending machines by modifying 10
CFR 431.291 to specify that the regulatory
provisions of 10 CFR 430.33 and 430.34 and
subparts D and E of 10 CFR part 430 are applicable
to beverage vending machines. DOE notes that
because the procedures in Parts 430 and 431 for
petitioning DOE for obtaining a test procedure
waiver are substantively the same (79 FR 26591,
26601(May 9, 2014)), the regulations for applying
for a test procedure waiver for beverage vending
machines are those found at 10 CFR 431.401 rather
than those found at 430.27.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
EPCA requires the test procedure for
beverage vending machines to be based
on ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15)) In addition,
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)) EPCA also provides
that the Secretary of Energy (Secretary)
shall review test procedures for all
covered products at least once every 7
years, and either amend the test
procedures (if the Secretary determines
that amended test procedures would
more accurately or fully comply with
the requirements of 42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3)) or publish a determination
in the Federal Register not to amend
them. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
In addition, if DOE determines that a
test procedure amendment is warranted,
it must publish the 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))
Pursuant to DOE’s obligations under
EPCA, DOE reviewed the BVM test
procedure at 10 CFR 431.294 and
determined that the test procedure
could be amended to improve the
accuracy of the test procedure for
beverage vending machines and to
incorporate new technology features. As
such, on August 11, 2014, DOE
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) proposing
amendments to its test procedure (2014
BVM test procedure NOPR). 79 FR
46908. These proposed amendments
were presented at the BVM test
procedure NOPR public meeting held
on September 16, 2014. DOE received
written and verbal comments in
response to the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR at the NOPR public
meeting as well as throughout the
comment period. The amendments
adopted in this final rule respond to and
reflect upon those comments.
This final rule also fulfills DOE’s
obligation to periodically review its test
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45759
procedures under 42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(1)(A). DOE anticipates that its
next evaluation of this test procedure
will occur in a manner consistent with
the timeline set out in this provision.
DOE also reviewed the adopted
amendments to determine whether they
would have an impact on the measured
energy consumption of covered
beverage vending machines. DOE has
determined that the test procedure
amendments incorporating provisions to
account for low power modes will
change the measured energy use of
beverage vending machines when
compared to the current BVM test
procedure, as established by DOE in the
2006 BVM test procedure final rule
(subsequent references to DOE’s
‘‘current test procedure’’ for beverage
vending machines in this document
refer to the test procedure established by
DOE in the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule as it existed at 10 CFR 431.294
in the edition of 10 CFR parts 200 to 499
revised as of January 1, 2015).
Therefore, DOE is considering the
impacts of these changes as part of its
standards rulemaking for beverage
vending machines (‘‘BVM energy
conservation standards rulemaking,’’
Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022)
and will not require use of these test
procedure provisions (contained in
Appendix B) until the compliance date
of any amended standards set as a result
of that rulemaking.
B. Background
EPCA requires the test procedure for
beverage vending machines to be based
on American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)/American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Standard 32.1–2004 (ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2004), ‘‘Methods of
Testing for Rating Vending Machines for
Bottled, Canned or Other Sealed
Beverages.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15)) In
December 2006, DOE published a final
rule establishing a test procedure for
beverage vending machines, among
other products and equipment (the 2006
BVM test procedure final rule). 71 FR
71340, 71355 (Dec. 8, 2006). In that final
rule, consistent with 42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(15), DOE adopted ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004 as the
DOE test procedure, except that DOE
modified ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2004 to require parties to test
equipment with dual nameplate
voltages at the lower of the two voltages
only. 71 FR at 71355.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004
specifies a method for determining the
capacity of vending machines, referred
to as ‘‘vendible capacity,’’ which is
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45760
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
essentially the maximum number of
standard sealed beverages a vending
machine can hold for sale. In the 2006
BVM test procedure final rule, however,
DOE adopted the ‘‘refrigerated volume’’
measure in section 5.2, ‘‘Refrigerated
Volume Calculation,’’ of ANSI/
Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers (AHAM) HRF–1–2004
(ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004) in addition
to the ‘‘vendible capacity’’ measure, as
referred to in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2004. 71 FR at 71355. DOE
adopted ‘‘refrigerated volume’’ as the
primary measure of capacity for
beverage vending machines because of
the variety of dispensing mechanisms
and storage arrangements among similar
machines that may lead to potentially
different refrigerated volumes for
different machines with the same
vendible capacity. In addition, EPCA
has historically used upper limits on
energy use as a function of volume for
the purposes of establishing energy
conservation standards for refrigeration
equipment. Id.
In the 2006 BVM test procedure final
rule, DOE determined that section 5.2 of
ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004, which
addresses the measurement of
refrigerated volume in household
freezers, is also applicable to beverage
vending machines and is more
appropriate than the language for
measurement of volume in household
refrigerators of section 4.2 of ANSI/
AHAM HRF–1–2004. Specifically,
section 5.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2004 includes provisions for
specific compartments and features that
are typically found in beverage vending
machines, which are similar to
compartments and features found in
freezers. Therefore, DOE adopted
‘‘refrigerated volume’’ in lieu of
‘‘vendible capacity’’ as the dimensional
metric for beverage vending machines in
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule.
Id.
Since the publication of the 2006
BVM test procedure final rule, ASHRAE
and AHAM have both published
updated test standards. The most recent
edition of the ASHRAE 32.1 test method
is ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010,
which includes changes that align
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010
with the nomenclature and
methodology used in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule (71 FR at 71355)
and the 2009 BVM energy conservation
standards final rule (74 FR 44914 (Aug.
31, 2009)). The most recent version of
the AHAM HRF–1 test standard, AHAM
HRF–1–2008, changes and reorganizes
some sections for simplicity and
usability, including the section relevant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
to measuring refrigerated volume of
beverage vending machines.
DOE reviewed these updated industry
standards and proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR to, among
other things, incorporate by reference
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010, with minor
modifications, as the DOE test
procedure for beverage vending
machines, for both determining daily
energy consumption (DEC) and
refrigerated volume. Specifically, DOE
proposed to adopt Appendix C of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010 for
determining refrigerated volume and
proposed to remove ANSI/AHAM HRF–
1–2004 from the documents
incorporated by reference in 10 CFR
431.293. 79 FR 46908, 46911–46912
(Aug. 11, 2014). In addition to updating
the BVM test procedure to incorporate
by reference the latest industry
standards, DOE also proposed a number
of other amendments to clarify DOE’s
BVM regulations, remove ambiguity
from the BVM test procedure, and adopt
provisions to account for low power
modes in the measured DEC. 79 FR
46908.
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
This final rule amends the DOE test
procedure for beverage vending
machines to clarify and remove
ambiguity from the procedure, as well
as incorporate several amendments that
account for updated industry test
methods and new equipment features.
This final rule also reorganizes the DOE
test procedure for beverage vending
machines into an Appendix A to
subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431, which
will be mandatory for representations
made starting 180 days after the final
rule is published in the Federal
Register, and an Appendix B, that will
be mandatory for equipment testing to
demonstrate compliance with any
amended energy conservation standards
adopted as a result of the BVM energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
(Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022)
Appendix A includes amendments
that (1) update the referenced test
method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010, (2) incorporate amendments
to clarify several ambiguities in the
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010, (3)
eliminate the requirement to test at the
90 °F ambient test condition, (4) clarify
the test procedure for combination
vending machines, (5) clarify the
requirements for loading of BVM units
under the DOE test procedure, (6)
specify the characteristics of a standard
test package, (7) clarify the average nextto-vend beverage temperature test
condition, (8) specify placement of
thermocouples during the DOE test
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
procedure, (9) establish provisions for
testing at the lowest application product
temperature, (10) clarify the treatment of
certain accessories during the DOE test
procedure, and (11) clarify the
certification and reporting requirements
for covered beverage vending machines.
DOE has concluded that these
amendments will serve to clarify the test
procedure. As such, and as noted above,
these clarifications and amendments are
mandatory for representations made
starting 180 days after the final rule is
published in the Federal Register, and
manufacturers will be required to use
Appendix A to demonstrate compliance
with existing energy conservation
standards for beverage vending
machines after that date. If desired,
manufacturers may elect to begin using
Appendix A on the effective date of this
final rule, 30 days after publication in
the Federal Register, instead of the
existing BVM test procedure
requirements in 10 CFR 431.294 as it
appeared in the 10 CFR parts 200 to 499
edition revised as of January 1, 2015.
Appendix B includes all provisions of
Appendix A, as well as provisions to
account for the impact of low power
modes on the measured DEC of beverage
vending machines. Appendix B is
intended to be used to demonstrate
compliance with any amended energy
conservation standards for beverage
vending machines established as part of
the parallel BVM energy conservation
standards rulemaking. (Docket No.
EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022)
Manufacturers will be required to use
the test procedure adopted in Appendix
B to demonstrate compliance with any
future DOE energy conservation
standards for beverage vending
machines, as well as for labeling or
other representations as to the energy
use of refrigerated beverage vending
machines, beginning on the compliance
date of any final rule establishing
amended energy conservation standards
for beverage vending machines.
Prior to the compliance date of any
such amended energy conservation
standards, manufacturers must continue
to use the test procedure found in
Appendix A to demonstrate compliance
with existing DOE energy conservation
standards and for representations
concerning the energy use of
refrigerated beverage vending machines.
However, manufacturers may elect to
use the amended test procedure in
Appendix B established as a result of
this rulemaking to demonstrate
compliance with any future, amended
standards prior to the compliance date
of such standards. Manufacturers who
choose to use the amended test
procedure in Appendix B early must
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
ensure that their equipment satisfies any
applicable amended energy
conservation standards established as a
result of the BVM energy conservation
standards rulemaking. In other words, a
manufacturer may elect to use the test
procedure in Appendix B prior to the
established compliance date of any
amended energy conservation standards
to make representations with respect to
the energy use of a basic model only if
it also elects to certify compliance with
the amended energy conservation
standards.
Finally, DOE is amending 10 CFR
429.52(b) with regard to reporting
requirements for beverage vending
machines, including a clarifying
amendment that the reported energy
consumption value for beverage vending
machines is based on the DEC measured
in accordance with the test procedure.
Similarly, DOE is amending the
introductory language found in 10 CFR
431.296 to clarify the applicability of
the DEC to the energy conservation
standards listed in that section.
III. Discussion
In this BVM final rule, DOE is
adopting several amendments to subpart
Q of 10 CFR part 431 to (1) clarify the
scope of DOE’s BVM regulations, (2)
incorporate several new definitions
relevant to testing beverage vending
machines, (3) update the industry test
45761
methods incorporated by reference into
the DOE test procedure, (4) update and
clarify DOE’s test procedure for
beverage vending machines, and (5)
clarify the language describing the
energy conservation standards for
beverage vending machines for the
purposes of reporting the DEC
determined in accordance with the test
procedure. DOE is also clarifying how
the DEC measured in accordance with
the test procedure is reported to DOE in
accordance with 10 CFR 429.52(b). The
amendments adopted in this final rule
are summarized in Table III.1 and
discussed in more detail in the
subsequent sections of this final rule, as
noted in the table.
TABLE III.1—SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS ADOPTED IN THIS FINAL RULE, THEIR LOCATION WITHIN THE CODE OF FEDERAL
REGULATIONS (CFR), AND THE APPLICABLE PREAMBLE DISCUSSION
Applicable preamble
discussion
CFR location
Topic
Summary of amendments
10 CFR 429.52(b) ................
Reporting Requirements ...
Section III.C.2.
10 CFR 431.291 ..................
Scope ................................
10 CFR 431.292 ..................
Definitions ..........................
10 CFR 431.293 ..................
Incorporation by Reference
10 CFR 431.294 ..................
Test Procedure ..................
Appendix A to Subpart Q of
Part 431.
Test Procedure Applicable
to Energy Conservation
Standards for which
Compliance was Required as of August 31,
2012.
Test Procedure Applicable
to Amended Energy
Conservation Standards
Being Considered in a
Related Rulemaking.
Energy Conservation
Standards.
Amend reporting requirements to reflect amendments
incorporated in Appendices A and B.
Clarify applicability of 10 CFR 430.33 and 430.34 and
subparts D and E of 10 CFR part 430 to beverage
vending machines.
Incorporate new definitions pertinent to testing beverage vending machines.
Update industry standards incorporated by reference
in the DOE test procedure to reflect the latest
versions.
Reorganize BVM test procedure into Appendices A
and B (see below).
Incorporate several minor amendments and clarifications to improve the accuracy and remove ambiguity.
Incorporate amendments included in Appendix A and
provisions for measuring low power modes.
Section III.B.
Clarify the applicability of the DEC measured in accordance with the test procedure to the energy conservation standards listed in this section.
Section III.C.2.
Appendix B to Subpart Q of
Part 431.
10 CFR 431.466 ..................
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
The amendments discussed in the
subsequent sections and adopted in this
final rule also respond to and reflect
comments by interested parties in
response to the proposed amendments
presented in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR. 79 FR 46908 (Aug. 11,
2014).
A. Appendix A: Clarifications and
Amendments to the DOE Test Procedure
In order to clarify and remove
ambiguity from the test procedure for
beverage vending machines, DOE is
amending subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431
by moving most of the existing test
procedure for beverage vending
machines from 10 CFR 431.294 to a new
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
Appendix A to subpart Q of 10 CFR part
431. In Appendix A, DOE is also
incorporating amendments to clarify
and update the current DOE test
procedure for beverage vending
machines in the following ways:
(1) Updating the referenced test
method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010,
(2) incorporating several additional
amendments to clarify ambiguities in
the ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010 test
method,
(3) eliminating testing at the 90 °F
ambient test condition,
(4) clarifying the test procedure for
combination vending machines,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Section III.C.1.
Section III.A.7 and III.A.10.
Section III.A.1.
N/A.
Section III.A.
(5) clarifying the requirements for
loading BVM models under the DOE test
procedure,
(6) clarifying the specifications of the
standard product,
(7) clarifying the next-to-vend
beverage temperature test condition,
(8) specifying placement of
thermocouples during the DOE test
procedure,
(9) establishing testing provisions at
the lowest application product
temperature, and
(10) clarifying the treatment of certain
accessories when conducting the DOE
test procedure.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE also proposed a new
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45762
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
definition and optional test method for
‘‘fully cooled.’’ 79 FR 46908, 46915–17
(Aug. 11, 2014). DOE discusses this
issue in section III.A.8 of this final rule.
However, due to the complexity and
scope of the comments received on this
issue, DOE is electing to address the
differentiation of Class A and Class B
equipment, including the definition of
fully cooled, in the ongoing BVM energy
conservation standard rulemaking
instead of this test procedure final rule.
(Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–
0022).
The subsequent sections III.A.1
through III.A.11 of this final rule discuss
the specific test procedure provisions
that required clarification, any
comments received on these topics in
response to the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE’s response to
those comments, and any final
amendments DOE is adopting in this
final rule.
1. Updating the Referenced Test Method
The current DOE test procedure for
beverage vending machines incorporates
by reference two industry test
procedures, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2004 and ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–
2004, which establish a test method for
beverage vending machines and a
method for determining refrigerated
volume, respectively. Each of these
industry test procedures has been
updated since the publication of the
DOE test procedure in 2006. The most
current versions are ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010 and AHAM HRF–
1–2008.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010
was amended from the 2004 version to
include new definitions and
nomenclature established by DOE in the
2009 BVM final rule. These changes
include removing references to specific
sealed-bottle package designs such as
‘‘bottled’’ or ‘‘canned,’’ revising the
scope, and incorporating a new
Appendix C, ‘‘Measurement of
Volume,’’ which consists of certain
portions of ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004
for measuring the refrigerated volume.
Specifically, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2004 incorporated the portions of
ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004 currently
referenced in the DOE test procedure,
section 5.2 (excluding subsections
5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4), which describes
the method for determining refrigerated
volume for residential freezers, as well
as section 5.1, which describes the
purpose of the section. These new
amendments make the ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010 test procedure
identical to the DOE test procedure
established in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule. As the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
amendments to ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010 are primarily
editorial, they do not affect the tested
DEC. In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to update the
industry test method incorporated by
reference to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010 for the measurement of DEC
and vendible capacity. 79 FR 46908,
46911–46912 (Aug. 11, 2014).
Since DOE published the 2006 BVM
test procedure final rule, AHAM has
released a new version of the AHAM
HRF–1 test method, which reorganizes
and simplifies the test method as
presented in ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004.
The revised AHAM HRF–1 test method,
ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2008, combines
sections 4, 5, and 6, which relate to
measuring the refrigerated volume of
refrigerators and freezers, into one
section describing methods for
determining the refrigerated volume of
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, wine
chillers, and freezers. This unified and
simplified method includes several
changes regarding the inclusion or
exclusion of certain special features
from the determination of refrigerated
volume, such that DOE believes AHAM
HRF–1–2008 has the potential to yield
refrigerated volume values that differ
slightly from those measured and
calculated using the method in the
current DOE test procedure. As such, in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to adopt Appendix C of
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010 as
the volume measurement methodology
in its amended BVM test procedure. In
the NOPR, DOE stated that adopting
Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010 would simplify testing for
manufacturers because it would allow
them to reference a single document
containing all information needed to
conduct the DOE test procedure. DOE
also stated that it did not believe that
the updated AHAM HRF–1–2008 test
procedure has sufficient additional
merit, compared to the volume
calculation method included in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010, to justify
the additional burden on manufacturers.
79 FR at 46912. Commensurate with this
proposal, DOE also proposed to remove
ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004 from the
documents incorporated by reference in
10 CFR 431.293. Id.
In response to these proposals, DOE
received several comments from
interested parties regarding which
industry test methods DOE should
incorporate by reference and the
impacts of updating the industry test
methods incorporated by reference in
the DOE test procedure. Automated
Merchandising Systems, Inc. (AMS),
Sanden Vendo America Inc. (SVA), and
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Coca-Cola generally supported DOE’s
proposal to update its test procedure
reference to ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010
(AMS, No. 0007 at p. 1; 4 SVA, No. 0008
at p. 1; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2).
Coca-Cola and ASHRAE’s Standard
Project Committee (SPC) 32.1
recommended that DOE wait for
ASHRAE 32.1 revisions before adopting
a new version of 32.1. The California
investor-owned utilities (CA IOUs),
including Pacific Gas & Electric,
Southern California Gas Company,
Southern California Edison, and San
Diego Gas and Electric, commented that
DOE should align new test procedure
development with ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010 and track the efforts of the
ASHRAE Standard Project Committee
32.1 (ASHRAE SPC 32.1) to incorporate
changes into Appendix B before
publication of the final rule (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 0005 at
p. 2; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p.
1–2).
DOE appreciates comments from
interested parties and agrees that
alignment with the most recent version
of the industry test method, ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1, is advisable and will
make testing beverage vending
machines more consistent with the
latest industry methods. DOE is aware
that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 was convened in
January 2014 and has been meeting
monthly to discuss potential updates to
the ASHRAE 32.1 standard.5 DOE has
been participating in these meetings to
stay abreast of the changes ASHRAE
SPC 32.1 is considering. To the extent
possible, DOE has sought to align this
final rule with those discussions and
proposed updates. However, DOE notes
that the discussions of the committee
are not final until such amendments are
approved as a new version of the
ASHRAE 32.1 standard. At this time,
DOE is not aware of ASHRAE’s specific
timeline for making such an updated
version available. DOE also notes that
DOE must also consider its obligations
under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A) to review
test procedures every 7 years, as well as
the relationship between the BVM test
4 A notation in this form provides a reference for
information that is in the docket of DOE’s
rulemaking to develop test procedures for beverage
vending machines (Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–TP–
0045, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov).
This particular notation refers to a comment: (1)
submitted by Automated Merchandising Systems,
Inc. (AMS); (2) appearing in document number
0007 of the docket; and (3) appearing on page 1 of
that document.
5 The meeting minutes for ASHRAE SPC 32.1 are
available at: https://spc321.ashraepcs.org/. DOE
notes that, as of April 10, 2015, the Web site was
last updated June 10, 2014 and, as such, only
meeting minutes through May 2014 were available,
although the committee has continued to meet since
that time.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
procedure rulemaking and the ongoing
BVM energy conservation standards
rulemaking, when determining
timelines. As such, DOE is compelled to
move forward with finalizing the BVM
test procedure amendments, as
presented in this final rule, to satisfy its
EPCA requirements and not adversely
impact the BVM energy conservation
standards rulemaking schedule.
Regarding DOE’s proposal to update
the test method for determining
refrigerated volume, Coca-Cola
expressed support for the method
described in HRF–1–2008 for
determining refrigerated volume but
emphasized that measurements
resulting from these proposed
clarifications would render different
results than existing procedure, as
opposed to DOE’s proposed adoption of
Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2)
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and AMS objected to
DOE’s proposal to update the referenced
method of test for the measurement of
refrigerated volume in its test procedure
from section 5 of ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–
2004 to Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1–2010. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No.
0011 at p. 1–2; AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 1–
2) In particular, ASHRAE SPC 32.1
stated that they are considering
updating Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1–2010 to reference section 4 of
AHAM HRF–1–2008 to simplify the
refrigerated volume measurement
process that would result in minimal
differences in the measurement of
refrigerated volume. (ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1–2) AMS
commented that the new calculations
would affect the Maximum Daily Energy
Consumption (MDEC) of their machines.
(AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 1–2)
In response to comments regarding
the proposed test method for
determining refrigerated volume, DOE
analyzed ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004,
AHAM HRF–1–2008, and Appendix C
of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010 and
compared the relevant methods. DOE
believes AHAM HRF–1–2008 has the
potential to yield refrigerated volume
values that differ slightly from those
calculated using ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–
2004, which was the method
incorporated by reference in the 2006
BVM test procedure final rule, as
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 acknowledged
during the NOPR public meeting. DOE
does not believe that the updated
method for computing refrigerated
volume from section 4 of the AHAM
HRF–1–2008 test method has sufficient
additional merit when compared to the
volume calculation method included in
Appendix C of the ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010, which adopts
section 5.2 (excluding subsections
5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4) of ANSI/AHAM
HRF–1–2004. Therefore, DOE is
adopting provisions to continue
referencing ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004,
as incorporated into Appendix C of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010.
In addition, adopting Appendix C of
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010 will
allow manufacturers to reference a
single industry standard containing all
information needed to conduct the DOE
test procedure for beverage vending
machines and will also limit
manufacturer testing burden since they
will only have to purchase one industry
standard to complete the DOE test
procedure. For these reasons, DOE is
updating the industry test method
incorporated by reference to ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010 for the
measurement of refrigerated volume and
removing the incorporation by reference
of ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004 from the
DOE test procedure. Accordingly, DOE
is also amending the definition for
refrigerated volume at § 431.292 to
reference the appropriate standard.
2. Other Minor Clarifications and
Amendments to ASHRAE 32.1–2010
In reviewing ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010, and in light of the comments
received from interested parties
45763
suggesting that DOE follow the work of
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 to update the
ASHRAE 32.1 test method, DOE is
adopting several additional
clarifications in this final rule.
Specifically, DOE is clarifying: (1) The
ambient temperature and relative
humidity tolerances, (2) the voltage
tolerances for equipment with dual
nameplate voltages, (3) the requirements
for sampling and recording of specific
test data, and (4) how to calculate DEC
based on tested values determined in
the ASHRAE 32.1 test method.
DOE is incorporating these
amendments in response to comments
that DOE should align updates to the
DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines with the updates
being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1.
DOE has determined that these
amendments will improve the clarity
and repeatability of the DOE test
procedure and is incorporating these
amendments in Appendices A and B of
the BVM test procedure.
a. Ambient Temperature and Relative
Humidity Tolerance
In written comments, AMS suggested
that DOE clarify permissible
temperature limits during testing (AMS,
No. 0007 at p. 3). DOE appreciates the
comment, and wishes to clarify that
ambient temperature and humidity shall
be maintained within the ranges
specified in Table 1, ‘‘Standard Test
Conditions,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010 for each recorded measurement for
the duration of the test, including
stabilization. The ambient temperature
and relative humidity requirements
from Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010 that are pertinent to the DOE test
procedure are shown in Table III.2. To
clarify that the tolerance on relative
humidity is in fact in the units of
‘‘percent relative humidity (percent
RH)’’ and not a percentage of the
measured value, the acceptable range is
also provided in Table III.2.
TABLE III.2—AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY SPECIFIED VALUE AND TOLERANCE
Value
Tolerance
Ambient Temperature ....................
Relative Humidity ...........................
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Test and pretest condition
75 °F .............................................
45 percent RH ..............................
±2 °F .............................................
±5 percent RH ..............................
In this final rule, DOE is adopting a
similar table in section 2.1 of Appendix
A and B to clearly specify the
appropriate test conditions and
applicable tolerances for, among other
things, the ambient temperature and
relative humidity.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
DOE’s amendments specifying the
ambient temperature and relative
humidity tolerances in Table 1 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1–2010 as an instantaneous
tolerance to be applied to each
measurement are consistent with the
updates ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is
considering in their revisions of the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Acceptable range
73–77 °F
40–50 percent RH
ASHRAE 32.1 standard. In addition,
such treatment is consistent with the
specification of ambient conditions in
the DOE test procedure for similar
equipment, including commercial
refrigeration equipment (10 CFR 431.64)
and automatic commercial ice makers
(10 CFR 431.134). DOE also notes,
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45764
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
however, that such treatment is different
than the tolerance applied to the
integrated average temperature (as
described in section III.A.7 of this final
rule), which is a single tolerance
applied to that one average value and is
not applicable to each temperature
measurement in that case.
In addition, when reviewing the
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010 test method
in conjunction with ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
DOE determined that the accuracy
requirements for the equipment used to
measure relative humidity are not
clearly specified. As the relative
humidity is required to be maintained
within ±5 percent RH of the specified
value, the precision of the measurement
equipment must be of higher resolution
than the allowed tolerance in order to
ensure that the relative humidity is in
fact maintained within such a range. As
such, and in accordance with the
changes being considered by ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, DOE is adopting provisions in
section 1.1 of Appendices A and B that
relative humidity shall be measured
with a calibrated instrument accurate to
±2 percent RH at the ambient conditions
specified in Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1–2010. That is, the instrument must
have a measured accuracy of ±2 percent
RH at 45 percent RH, or 4.4 percent of
the measured value.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
b. Voltage and Frequency Tolerances
Following publication of the NOPR,
DOE learned that ASHRAE SPC 32.1
was considering changes to ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1–2010 concerning BVM
nameplate voltages. Specifically, DOE
became aware that ASHRAE SPC 32.1
was considering a change such that the
same tolerances on nameplate voltage
and frequency that apply to equipment
with single nameplate voltages, namely
±2 percent and ±1 percent, respectively,
should also apply to the tested voltage
for equipment with dual nameplate
voltages. Consistent with the changes
being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
DOE determined that the tolerances on
voltage and frequency listed in
paragraph (a) of section 6.2, ‘‘Voltage
and Frequency,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1–2010 (which addresses beverage
vending machines with single
nameplate voltages) are not equivalently
applied to equipment with dual
nameplate voltages in paragraph (b) of
section 6.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010. As such, DOE is adopting, in this
final rule, provisions in section 2.1 of
Appendices A and B that beverage
vending machines with dual nameplate
voltages must be conducted at the lower
of the two voltages ±2 percent and at the
rated frequency ±1 percent.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
c. Data Collection
In section 7.2.2.3, ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1–2010 currently specifies that the
following data shall be recorded for 24
consecutive hours after stabilization has
been achieved: Ambient temperature,
relative humidity, average beverage
temperature, energy consumption, input
voltage, and time. However, ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1–2010 does not provide
specific requirements regarding how
frequently such data should be sampled.
In response to the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, AMS recommended
that DOE clearly state at what interval
each reading is taken, and suggested
that readings should be recorded at a
minimum frequency of once per minute.
(AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3)
DOE agrees with AMS that the
sampling interval for data collection
should be clearly specified, as collecting
data at different sampling intervals can
affect the energy consumption results.
As such, DOE is clarifying in section
2.2.4 of Appendix A and 2.2.6 of
Appendix B that the sampling interval
must be at least 1 minute; that is, each
measured data variable should be
recorded at least every 1 minute. DOE
notes that this requirement is also
consistent with the changes being
considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1 for
future revisions of the ASHRAE 32.1
standard.
In addition, DOE notes that, as part of
this final rule, DOE is also adopting
amendments to the BVM test procedure
that change the terms that are used to
refer to the ‘‘average beverage
temperature,’’ as described more fully in
section III.A.7 and III.B.3 of this final
rule. Specifically, instead of the
‘‘average beverage temperature,’’ as
referenced in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010, DOE’s test procedure for beverage
vending machines as adopted in this
final rule refers to the ‘‘instantaneous
average next-to-vend beverage
temperature’’ and the ‘‘integrated
average temperature.’’ As such, DOE is
clarifying in section 2.2.4 of Appendix
A and 2.2.6 of Appendix B that, in
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010, the ‘‘average beverage
temperature’’ refers to the
‘‘instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature.’’
d. Calculation of Daily Energy
Consumption.
Section 7.2.3, ‘‘Energy Consumption
Calculations,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010 specifies that the daily rated
energy consumption of each basic
model of a vending machine shall be
determined as:
ED = (ET/tT) × 24
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Where:
ED = primary rated energy consumption per
day, kWh,
ET = energy consumed during the test, kWh,
tT = duration of the test, h, and
24 = the number of hours per day.
In reviewing ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010, DOE realized that there may be
confusion regarding the terminology
used in this section and how these
values are to be used when determining
the DEC result for a given tested unit for
the purposes of rating equipment in
accordance with the DOE test
procedure. Specifically, the variable ED
is referred to as both the ‘‘daily rated
energy consumption’’ in the
introductory paragraph and the
‘‘primary rated energy consumption per
day’’ in the variable definitions below
the stated equation In section 2.3 of
Appendices A and B, DOE is referring
to the variable ED using only the term
‘‘primary rated energy consumption per
day’’ to describe how to use this value
when determining the DEC of each
tested beverage vending machine.6
DOE also notes that ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1–2010 currently does not specify
how to treat measured values when
calculating the DEC values in
accordance with section 7.2.3, ‘‘Energy
Consumption Calculations,’’ of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1–2010. In this final rule,
DOE is also adopting specifications in
section 2.3.1 of Appendix A and 2.3.3
of Appendix B that the primary rated
energy consumption per day (ED) must
be calculated with raw measured values
and rounded to units of 0.01 kWh/day.
3. Eliminating Testing at the 90 °F
Ambient Test Condition
Both ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–
2004, the test method incorporated by
reference in the DOE test procedure
adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule, and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010, the test method DOE is
incorporating by reference in the
amended test procedure as discussed in
section III.A.1 of this final rule, specify
two tests: One at an ambient condition
of 75 °F ± 2 °F and 45 percent ± 5
percent relative humidity (‘‘the 75 °F
ambient test condition’’) and the other
at an ambient condition of 90 °F ± 2 °F
and 65 percent ± 5 percent relative
humidity (‘‘the 90 °F ambient test
condition’’). By incorporating by
reference ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
6 DOE notes that additional calculations may be
required to determine the ‘‘daily energy
consumption’’ in accordance with the DOE BVM
test procedure adopted in this final rule to address
payment mechanisms, depending on the
configuration in which the beverage vending
machine is tested. See section III.A.11.a for more
information.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
32.1–2004, DOE’s current test procedure
for beverage vending machines requires
testing at both the 75 °F ambient test
condition and 90 °F ambient test
condition. In the energy conservation
standards rulemaking that culminated
in the 2009 BVM final rule, however,
DOE decided that only the measured
DEC determined at the 75 °F ambient
test condition would be used for the
purposes of demonstrating compliance
with applicable energy conservation
standards. The data taken at the 90 °F
ambient test condition were not used by
DOE in setting the standards established
in the 2009 BVM final rule and are not
used to demonstrate compliance with
those standards. 74 FR 44914, 44920
(Aug. 31, 2009) and 10 CFR 429.52.
However, the 2009 BVM final rule did
not similarly amend the DOE test
procedure to remove the requirement to
test at the 90 °F ambient test condition
and, as such, the requirement to test
covered BVM models at both the 75 °F
and 90 °F ambient test conditions
established in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule remained in place
until being reevaluated in this test
procedure rulemaking.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to amend its test
procedure to eliminate the requirement
to perform a test at the 90 °F ambient
test condition as described in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004 and
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010. 79
FR 46908, 46912–46913 (Aug. 11, 2014).
DOE understands that the 90 °F test is
used primarily to represent and evaluate
the performance of some units that may
be installed outdoors, especially in hothumid locations; however, as
mentioned above, the performance of a
beverage vending machine at the 90 °F
ambient test condition is not currently
used for DOE regulatory purposes.
Therefore, DOE does not see a need to
maintain the 90 °F test condition as part
of the DOE test procedure.
DOE believes that removing the 90 °F
ambient test condition test requirement
will also reduce manufacturer burden
associated with its test procedure by
eliminating testing that does not
significantly increase the accuracy or
representativeness of the DOE test
procedure and is unnecessary for
demonstrating compliance with DOE’s
energy conservation standards.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE requested comment on its
proposal to eliminate the requirement to
conduct testing at the 90 °F ambient test
condition. 79 FR at 46913. AMS, SVA,
and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 supported the
elimination of testing at the 90 °F test
condition. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 2; SVA,
No. 0008 at p. 1; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
0011 at p. 2) Natural Resources Canada
(NRCan) asked why DOE would not test
their machines according to worst case
conditions. (NRCan, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 25) Coca-Cola
also agreed with DOE that there should
be a single set of conditions for testing
and rating purposes. Coca-Cola,
however, stated that some machines are
designed for higher ambient
temperatures, and asked DOE to factor
this into the application of test results,
even if the machine is not tested at 90
°F. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2)
DOE appreciates the comments from
AMS, SVA, and ASHRAE SPC 32.1
supporting the elimination of the 90 °F
ambient test condition and Coca-Cola’s
comment to have a single set of
conditions for testing and rating
purposes. In response to the comment
from NRCan, DOE notes that it is
required to create test procedures that
are representative of the performance of
the equipment under an average cycle of
use. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) DOE believes
that the test conditions required by the
test procedure, namely 75 °F and 45
percent relative humidity, are
reasonably representative of the average
operating conditions of most beverage
vending machines. In particular, DOE
notes that the majority of beverage
vending machines are installed indoors
(see chapter 7 of the BVM energy
conservation standard preliminary
analysis technical support document;
Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022)
and that such indoor environments are
normally kept close to the average
temperature used for the DOE test. As
such, DOE believes that the DEC values
measured at the current test conditions
are an accurate reflection of field energy
use and does not believe a test condition
of 90 °F would be representative of field
energy use for the majority of
equipment. In response to Coca-Cola’s
comment regarding the application of
test results on machines designed for
higher ambient temperatures, DOE
understands that some beverage vending
machines are placed in locations that
experience ambient temperature and
relative humidity conditions that differ
from those required in the test
procedure, including environments that
are often warmer and have higher
relative humidity than specified by
ASHRAE 32.1–2010. However, it is not
feasible or realistic to test BVM models
at all the different ambient temperature
conditions they may experience in the
field. First, doing so would be extremely
burdensome. Second, it is difficult to
determine which BVM models will be
placed in different ambient conditions
(e.g., tropical conditions), as often the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45765
same BVM model may be placed
indoors or outdoors. In the BVM energy
conservation standards preliminary
analysis, DOE estimated that 18 percent
of Class B and Combination B 7 beverage
vending machines were located
outdoors, and all Class A and
Combination A 7 equipment is located
indoors (see chapter 7 of the BVM
energy conservation standard
preliminary analysis technical support
document (TSD)). DOE believes that the
required test condition of 75 °F is
representative of the indoor
environments in which the majority of
BVM units are placed. Therefore, DOE
believes the 75 °F ambient test
condition provides a reasonable and
comparable representation of energy
performance for all BVM models and
testing at alternative test conditions is
not necessary. DOE is accounting for the
variable energy performance of beverage
vending machines that are placed
outdoors as part of the energy use
analysis associated with the BVM
energy conservation standard
rulemaking. However, DOE is not
considering different or alternative
energy conservation standards for such
equipment based on the fact that most
BVM models can be placed indoors or
outdoors and that, as a result, a standard
based on analysis at the 75 °F test
procedure ambient condition would be
applicable. (See Docket No. EERE–
2013–BT–STD–0022 for more
information.)
Thus, in this final rule, DOE is
removing the requirement to conduct
testing at the 90 °F ambient test
condition as part of the DOE test
procedure. DOE is clarifying the
ambient test conditions necessary for
testing in accordance with the DOE test
procedure in a new Table A.1 in
Appendix A and Table B.1 in Appendix
B in section 2.1 of both Appendices A
and B. DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC
32.1 is also currently considering
updating ASHRAE 32.1 to remove the
90 °F ambient test condition.
4. Test Procedure for Combination
Vending Machines
‘‘Combination vending machine’’ is
currently defined as a refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending
machine that also has non-refrigerated
7 In the DOE energy conservation standard
preliminary analysis, DOE discussed dividing the
‘‘combination vending machine’’ equipment class
into ‘‘Combination A’’ equipment that was fully
cooled and ‘‘Combination B’’ equipment that was
not fully cooled, similar to the Class A and Class
B distinction. See chapter 2 of the BVM energy
conservation standard preliminary analysis TSD.
Additionally, DOE is proposing language to address
equipment class distinctions as part of the energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45766
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
volumes for the purpose of vending
other, non-‘‘sealed beverage’’
merchandise. 10 CFR 431.292. Based on
this definition, any machine (a) that
upon payment dispenses beverages in
sealed containers and (b) in which the
entire internal storage volume is
refrigerated is not a combination
vending machine.
In the 2009 BVM final rule, DOE
elected to define ‘‘combination vending
machine,’’ but refrained from setting
standards for combination vending
machines due to a lack of data regarding
their energy performance. Id. However,
DOE is currently considering standards
for combination vending machines in a
parallel energy conservation standards
rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE–2013–
BT–STD–0022)
While combination vending machines
are not currently required to comply
with energy conservation standards, any
representations with regard to the DEC
of such equipment must still be made in
accordance with the DOE BVM test
procedure. DOE’s current test procedure
is appropriate for the evaluation of the
refrigerated volume, vendible capacity,
and energy use of combination vending
machines. DOE notes, however, that the
application of the BVM test procedure
may require clarification as to how it is
applied to combination vending
machines. Accordingly, in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
proposed to clarify the test procedure
for combination vending machines. 79
FR 46908, 46913–46914 (Aug. 11, 2014).
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed that only the refrigerated
compartment would be considered in
the refrigerated volume calculation,
while both refrigerated and nonrefrigerated compartments would be
considered in the vendible capacity
calculation. Similarly, DOE proposed
that standard test packages be placed in
the next-to-vend product location only
in the refrigerated portion of the
refrigerated beverage vending machine,
and only the refrigerated portion of the
combination vending machine be
required to be fully loaded to capacity.
79 FR at 46914.
With regard to the measurement of
DEC for combination vending machines,
DOE also proposed that any lighting or
other energy-consuming features in the
non-refrigerated compartment be fully
energized during the test procedure and
operated in the same manner as any
lighting or features in the refrigerated
compartment. DOE also proposed that
the total energy use of the machine
measured during the 24-hour test would
comprise the DEC, as measured in
accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010. Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed the addition of
these clarifications to the DOE test
procedure at 10 CFR 431.294 for
combination vending machines and
requested comment on the applicability
of the existing test procedure, as
clarified, to combination vending
machines. In response, SVA and
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 commented that they
believe the test procedure is applicable
to combination vending machines.
(SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2) Coca-Cola
commented that the test was applicable
to combination vending machines that
have more than half of the machine
capacity refrigerated. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 3) AMS noted that the test
procedure does not specify how or what
products would be required to be loaded
in the non-refrigerated product
compartment during the test, and stated
this could affect the energy
consumption of combination vending
machines that do not provide 100
percent thermal isolation between
zones. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 2) AMS
commented that the insulation between
refrigerated and non-refrigerated zones
does not completely separate the two
zones and hence should not be excluded
from the MDEC calculation. (AMS, No.
0007 at p. 4)
DOE appreciates the comments from
SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 confirming
DOE’s position that the DOE test
procedure is applicable to combination
vending machines. However, DOE
disagrees with Coca-Cola’s comment
that they believe the test is only
applicable to combination vending
machines that have more than half of
the machine capacity refrigerated. The
DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines is applicable to all
equipment that meets the definition of
a ‘‘refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machine,’’ as defined
at 10 CFR 431.292, including Class A,
Class B, and combination vending
machines. As noted above, DOE
currently defines ‘‘combination vending
machine’’ as a refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine that
also has non-refrigerated volumes for
the purpose of vending other, non‘‘sealed beverage’’ merchandise. 10 CFR
431.292. DOE notes that its regulations
do not restrict the applicability of the
definition based on the relative volumes
of the refrigerated and non-refrigerated
volumes. As stated previously, any
equipment that is capable of vending
bottled or canned beverages upon
payment from a refrigerated
compartment contained within the unit,
and also has non-refrigerated
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
compartments for the purpose of
vending other, non-‘‘sealed beverage’’
merchandise, meets the definition of a
combination vending machine
regardless of the relative volume of the
refrigerated and non-refrigerated
compartments.
In considering the applicability of the
combination vending machine
definition, DOE wishes to clarify that
combination vending machines must
include compartments that are
physically separated. However, DOE
acknowledges that some combination
equipment designs employ a common
product delivery chute between the
refrigerated and non-refrigerated
compartments. As such, DOE also
wishes to clarify that such physically
separate compartments in a combination
vending machine may or may not share
a common product delivery chute for
the purposes of delivering vendible
merchandise to the customer. To permit
additional consideration of these issues
and to provide more opportunity for
comment, DOE will further address the
definition of combination vending
machine in the standards rulemaking
(Docket EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022).
DOE notes that any changes to the
definition adopted in the standards
rulemaking would be to provide more
clarity of the distinctions between the
various product classes and would not
change the appropriate classifications.
With regard to the determination of
refrigerated volume and vendible
capacity for combination vending
machines, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is also
considering specifying that both the
refrigerated volume and vendible
capacity measurements refer only to the
deliberately refrigerated
compartment(s). In consideration of
these changes suggested by ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, DOE is also adopting wording
changes in Appendices A and B to help
clarify testing of refrigerated and nonrefrigerated compartments. Section 3.2
of each appendix specifies that the
vendible capacity to be measured
includes only the capacity of the
refrigerated compartment; this is a
change from DOE’s proposed approach
in the BVM test procedure NOPR, where
DOE had proposed to include the entire
volume from which the product may be
vended, whether or not that volume is
refrigerated. In this final rule, DOE is
also clarifying in section 3.1 of each
appendix that the refrigerated volume
measurement only includes the
refrigerated compartment, and, in
section 2.2.1.3 of each appendix, that
only this compartment shall be fully
loaded to capacity with standard
product and test packages. These
clarifications are consistent with the
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
changes being considered by ASHRAE
SPC 32.1 to the ASHRAE 32.1 standard.
DOE will continue to consider how to
delineate more clearly the distinction
between refrigerated and nonrefrigerated compartments as it
addresses the definition of combination
vending machine in the standards
rulemaking (Docket EERE–2013–BT–
STD–0022). Because the goal is to
ensure the regulatory text is clear and
consistent between the test procedure,
the definitions and the standards, DOE
may make, as part of the standards
rulemaking, conforming changes to
these sections to reflect any final
changes to the definition of combination
vending machine.
DOE agrees with AMS that the
loading of non-refrigerated
compartments for the purposes of
testing combination vending machines
requires clarification. The thermal mass
of any items loaded into the volumes
that are not refrigerated may affect the
measured DEC of equipment and, as
such, it is important that the loading of
these compartments be done
consistently to ensure repeatable and
comparable results. DOE also notes that
there is significant variability in the
thermal mass of the different ‘‘nonsealed beverage merchandise’’ that
might be loaded into the volumes that
are not refrigerated. As such, as
mentioned previously, in this final rule,
DOE is clarifying in section 2.2.1.3 of
Appendices A and B to Subpart Q of
Part 431 that, during conduct of the test
procedure, the non-refrigerated
compartments of combination vending
machines must not be loaded with any
standard products or other vendible
merchandise. In response to AMS’s
comment suggesting that the refrigerated
and non-refrigerated zones may not be
completely separated and, thus, should
be considered in the calculation of the
standard level for combination
equipment, DOE agrees with AMS that
some combination vending machines
may be designed such that the
refrigerated and non-refrigerated
compartments are not completely
thermally isolated, such as from air
leakage through a shared product
delivery chute. However, DOE notes
that a refrigerated compartment that has
a thermal gradient is considered to be
zone-cooled. As noted above, DOE is
continuing to consider how best to
clarify the distinction between
refrigerated and non-refrigerated
compartments in a combination vending
machine as part of the standards
rulemaking. Regarding the standard
level for such combination equipment,
DOE notes that combination vending
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
machines are not currently subject to
standards but that DOE is considering
new standards for such equipment in
the ongoing BVM energy conservation
standard rulemaking. (Docket No.
EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022) DOE
acknowledges that the fact that there
may be some heat transfer between the
non-refrigerated and refrigerated
volumes may affect the appropriate
energy conservation standard level, and
DOE will consider such in the setting of
an appropriate standard level for this
equipment.
5. Loading of BVM Models When
Conducting the DOE Test Procedure
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to add language
to the BVM test procedure to clarify the
loading requirements for beverage
vending machines that are offered in a
variety of configurations and may be
capable of vending other refrigerated
merchandise from their refrigerated
volumes. 79 FR 46908, 46914 (Aug. 11,
2014). Specifically, DOE proposed to
amend the regulatory text to clarify that,
for beverage vending machines that are
available with a variety of product
storage configurations, the refrigerated
compartment(s) should be configured,
for purposes of testing, to hold the
maximum number of sealed beverages
that it is capable of accommodating per
manufacturer specifications. Id. For
example, if some areas of the
refrigerated volume can be configured
either to vend sealed beverages or to
vend other refrigerated merchandise, the
equipment should be configured and
loaded with the maximum number of
sealed beverages in the refrigerated
compartment(s) for testing.
DOE understands that tests conducted
with other configurations may produce
different results because of the decrease
in thermal mass in the refrigerated
space. Various configurations that differ
in placement and type of shelving only
may be placed in the same basic model
with the performance at the maximum
beverage configuration used to represent
the performance of all of the
configurations in the basic model.
Alternatively, if a manufacturer wishes
to make different representations
regarding the energy consumption of a
beverage vending machine in various
shelving configurations, the
manufacturer may elect to test and
certify each unique shelving
configuration as a separate basic
model.8 In that case, the unique
8 For purposes of beverage vending machines,
basic model means all units of a refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machine (or class
thereof) manufactured by one manufacturer, having
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45767
shelving configuration for that BVM
model would comprise the ‘‘maximum
beverage configuration’’ for that model.
In response to DOE’s proposed
language regarding the loading
requirements for BVM models subject to
the DOE test procedure, ASHRAE SPC
32.1 expressed support for DOE’s
proposal to add language to the DOE test
procedure in Appendices A and B to
clarify the loading requirements for
covered BVM models. (ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2) DOE did not
receive any negative comments on this
proposal. As such, in this final rule,
DOE has added language to the DOE test
procedure in section 2.2.1 of
Appendices A and B to clarify the
loading requirements for the refrigerated
compartment(s) of BVM models. As
noted in section III.A.4 of this final rule,
DOE is also clarifying that nonrefrigerated compartments should be left
empty and not loaded with any vendible
products or merchandise.
6. Specifying the Characteristics of the
Standard Product
When testing a BVM model in
accordance with the DOE test procedure
established in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule, the equipment is to
be loaded with the maximum quantity
of standard products and with standard
test packages in each next-to-be-vended
position for each selection, as required
by section 7.2.2.1 and 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004. Section 5
of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004
further requires that the standard
product shall be 12-ounce cans for
machines that are capable of dispensing
12-ounce cans. For all other machines,
the standard product shall be the
product specified by the manufacturer
as the standard product.
The DOE test procedure established in
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule
does not provide any further specificity
regarding the characteristics of the
standard product when conducting the
DOE test procedure or the manufacture
of standard test packages. DOE
understands that there may be
variability among manufacturers and
testing laboratories with regard to the
characteristics of standard products and
the same primary energy source, and which have
essentially identical electrical, physical, and
functional characteristics that affect energy
consumption or energy efficiency. See 10 CFR
431.292. If differing shelving configurations affect
the energy consumption, these differing
configurations should be considered different basic
models, unless manufacturers elect to group BVM
units that vary in shelving configuration only into
the same BVM basic model and rate such model
based on the performance of the shelving
configuration that holds the maximum number of
sealed beverages.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45768
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
standard test packages. DOE believes
that such variability may result in minor
inconsistencies in test results. As such,
in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to clarify the
characteristics of the standard product
and standard test package to ensure test
results are as consistent and repeatable
as possible. 79 FR 46908, 46914–46915
(Aug. 11, 2014). Specifically, in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
proposed to add text to the BVM test
procedure in Appendices A and B,
specifying that the standard product
shall be:
• Standard 12-ounce aluminum
beverage cans filled with a liquid with
a density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/
mL) ± 0.1 g/mL at 36 °F for beverage
vending machines that are capable of
vending cans,
• 20-ounce plastic bottles filled with
a liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL ± 0.1
g/mL at 36 °F for beverage vending
machines that are not capable of
vending 12-ounce cans, but are capable
of vending 20-ounce bottles, and
• the product specified by the
manufacturer as the standard product
for beverage vending machines that are
not capable of vending 12-ounce cans or
20-ounce bottles.
Id.
DOE selected a density range of 1.0 g/
mL ± 0.1 g/mL, as it is inclusive of most
test fluids used today. For example, this
density range includes water, diet and
regular soda, fruit juices, and propylene
glycol/water mixtures up to 50/50
percent by volume. In addition, FischerNickel conducted research in 2004 that
compared the temperature
measurements of standard test packages
constructed in the manner specified by
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1 to the test
packages described in ASHRAE
Standard 117–2002, ‘‘Method of Testing
Closed Refrigerators and Freezers,’’
which are 1-pint plastic test packages
filled with a 50/50 mixture of water and
propylene glycol; little variation was
found in measured temperatures when
comparing different test package
materials and fluids.9
Section 3 of ASHRAE 32.1–2004 and
2010 defines the standard test package
as a beverage container of the size and
shape for which the vending machine is
designed, altered to include a
temperature-measuring instrument at its
center of mass. DOE finds the
requirements in ANSI/ASHRAE
9 Cowen, D. and Zabrowski, D. 2004.
‘‘Application and Evaluation of ASHRAE 117–2002
and ASHRAE 32.1–1997.’’ FSTC Report #
5011.04.01. Fischer-Nickel, Inc. Available at:
https://www.fishnick.com/publications/
appliancereports/refrigeration/Application_of_
ASHRAE_117_and_32.1.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
Standard 32.1–2004 and 2010 to be
fairly clear and concise when paired
with the clarification above regarding
the standard product. Therefore, DOE
did not propose additional clarifications
regarding the construction of standard
test packages beyond the proposed
clarification that the standard product
shall be 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce
bottles for BVM models that are capable
of vending cans or bottles, respectively,
filled with a liquid with a density of 1.0
g/mL ± 0.1 g/mL at 36 °F. Id.
In response to DOE’s proposals in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
received several comments from
interested parties supporting DOE’s
proposed clarifications. AMS expressed
their approval of DOE’s proposed
definition of a standard test package.
(AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3) Specifically,
Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1
agreed with DOE’s assertion that the
most common standard products were
12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3; ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2)
DOE also received several comments
suggesting improvements or requesting
further clarification to the proposed
standard product specifications. CocaCola noted that beverage vending
machines that dispense 330 mL
‘‘slimline’’ cans (which have a higher
ratio of height to diameter than standard
12-ounce cans) also exist. (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 3) AMS requested DOE
clarify the standard products for helix
driven machines, noting that they
typically do not dispense 12-ounce
cans. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 2–3) SVA
supported clarity in what a standard
product was, and noted that flexibility
was required for machines designed to
vend milk cartons, aseptic packs,
pouches, and energy drinks. (SVA, No.
0008 at p. 1)
DOE appreciates the comment from
AMS in support of the definition of a
standard test package. DOE also
appreciates the comments from
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and Coca-Cola
acknowledging that 12-ounce cans or
20-ounce bottles are the most common
standard products and supporting
DOE’s clarification of the standard
product definition. In response to the
comments from Coca-Cola, SVA, and
AMS regarding equipment that is
designed to vend non-standard
products, such as ‘‘slimline’’ cans, milk
cartons, aseptic packs, pouches, and
energy drinks, DOE agrees with
commenters that flexibility in the
specification of the standard product is
required for beverage vending machines
that are not capable of vending 12-ounce
cans or 20-ounce bottles. DOE
appreciates the specific examples of
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
such products provided by commenters
where such provision would be
required. For such beverage vending
machines, the product specified by the
manufacturer as the standard product
shall continue to be used in testing.
DOE will determine the appropriate
standard product for use in testing by
consulting manufacturer product
literature. DOE notes, however, that
manufacturers may only test equipment
with products other than 12-ounce cans
or 20-ounce bottles if the machine is not
capable of vending either of these
product types.
In light of these comments, DOE is not
altering the clarification regarding the
standard product proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR. Therefore,
in this final rule, DOE is adding a
clarification in section 2.2.1.4 of
Appendices A and B that the standard
product shall be 12-ounce cans or 20ounce bottles for BVM models that are
capable of vending 12-ounce cans or 20ounce bottles, respectively, filled with a
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL ± 0.1
g/mL at 36 °F, or the product specified
by the manufacturer as the standard
product for beverage vending machines
that are not capable of vending 12-ounce
cans or 20-ounce bottles.
7. Clarifying the Next-To-Vend Beverage
Temperature Test Condition
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004,
the test method incorporated by
reference in the DOE test procedure
adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule, states, ‘‘the beverage
temperature shall be measured in
standard test packages in each next-tobe-vended position for each selection.’’
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004
specifies an average next-to-vend
temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F ‘‘throughout
test.’’ The beverage temperature
requirements of the ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010 test method, which
DOE proposed to incorporate by
reference in the DOE BVM test
procedure as part of the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR (79 FR 46908, 46911–
46912 (Aug. 11, 2014)), are identical to
those of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–
2004. However, DOE became aware of a
need to clarify whether the next-to-vend
temperature specification of 36 °F ± 1 °F
‘‘throughout test’’ refers to a condition
in which the average next-to-vend
temperature is maintained at 36 °F ± 1
°F constantly for the duration of the test,
or one in which the temperature of nextto-vend beverages is averaged across all
selections and over the entire length of
the test, resulting in a single value of 36
°F ± 1 °F.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify its test
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
To clarify the applicability of the
instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature to the temperature
stabilization requirements in the test
procedure, DOE is also clarifying in
section 2.1.1.1, that temperature
stabilization is considered to be
achieved 24 hours after the
instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature reaches 36 °F ±1
°F.
Regarding the measurement of the
integrated average temperature, AMS
and SVA requested that some means be
provided by which the number of
thermocouples could be reduced. (AMS,
No. 0007 at p. 3; SVA, No. 0008 at p.
1) AMS further suggested that, as there
are many different BVM geometries and
configurations, manufacturers be
allowed some flexibility in how this was
accomplished, provided it could be
demonstrated that the method used
would generate equivalent DEC results
to testing with a thermocouple in each
next-to-vend beverage location. (AMS,
No. 0007 at p. 3) Coca-Cola agreed with
AMS and SVA and stated that added
temperatures sensors introduce
additional points of air infiltration into
the machine and thus may upset the
integrity of the test. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 4).
In response to the comments from
AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola regarding
reduction in the number of standard test
packages required for testing beverage
vending machines, DOE agrees with
commenters that there is potential to
reduce burden associated with testing
beverage vending machines with
horizontal product configurations,
which may have a large number of nextto-vend beverage locations, by reducing
the number of standard test packages
that are required to be loaded in the
next-to-vend beverage positions.
Furthermore, DOE believes that
provided the standard test packages are
spatially distributed across the face of
the beverage vending machine, the
measured integrated average
temperature should not be significantly
different than that determined with a
standard test package in each next-tovend location. This is particularly true
for fully-cooled, Class A beverage
vending machines (which are the
category of beverage vending machine
that most commonly has a horizontal
product arrangement), since the
temperature distribution across the
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
ER31JY15.021</GPH>
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Ti = average beverage temperature at interval
i, °F (°C),
Txi = measured beverage temperature for
next-to-vend test package x at interval i,
and
n = total number of next-to-vend test
packages.
ER31JY15.020</GPH>
cycling behavior. DOE notes that these
comments are consistent with DOE’s
proposed treatment of the ‘‘average
beverage temperature’’ condition and
the definition of integrated average
temperature proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR.
Therefore, in section 1.2 of
Appendices A and B, DOE is adopting
the definition of integrated average
temperature proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR. DOE is also
specifying, in section 2.1.1 of
Appendices A and B, that the integrated
average temperature must be 36 °F ± 1
°F, or the lowest application product
temperature as discussed in section
III.A.10 of this final rule, for the
purposes of testing equipment in
accordance with the DOE test
Where:
TIAT = integrated average temperature, °F (°C), procedure. 79 FR at 49615.
Txi = measured beverage temperature for
DOE notes that, while the integrated
next-to vend test package x at interval i,
average temperature is the measurement
d = total number of recorded intervals, and
that must be used to comply with DOE’s
n = total number of next-to-vend test
requirements regarding the average
packages.
beverage temperature of beverage
In response to DOE’s proposed
vending machines during the test period
definition of integrated average
(excluding the stabilization period), the
temperature, SVA and ASHRAE SPC
instantaneous spatial average
32.1 commented that they support
temperature of all standard test
DOE’s definition of integrated average
packages in the next-to-vend beverage
temperature. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1;
positions is still a relevant measurement
ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3)
for the purposes of determining the
ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Southern California presence of a refrigeration low power
Edison (SCE), and AMS added that
mode (see section III.B.3 of this final
maintaining each individual
rule) and for determining temperature
thermocouple within 1 °F of 36 °F was
stabilization prior to initiating the test
unnecessarily rigorous and not possible period. Specifically, section 7.2.2.2 of
in many machine designs. (ASHRAE
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010 specifies that
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at pp. 2–3; SCE,
temperature stabilization is considered
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at
to be achieved 24 hours after the
p. 43; AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3) Coca-Cola
‘‘average beverage temperature’’ reaches
also stated their understanding that 36
36 °F ±1 °F (and measured energy
°F ± 1 °F should be applied over the
consumption is within 2 percent for two
entire testing period and cannot be
successive 6-hr periods). In this case,
maintained for every individual data
the ‘‘average beverage temperature’’
measurement because of programmed
specified in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–2010
defrost cycles. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at
refers to the ‘‘instantaneous average
p. 3–4)
next-to-vend beverage temperature’’ and
DOE appreciates the comments from
not a temporal average (i.e., the
SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 supporting integrated average temperature).
DOE’s definition of integrated average
Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is also
temperature. In response to comments
adopting in section 1.2 of Appendices A
from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, SCE, and AMS, and B a new definition of instantaneous
DOE recognizes that it is not possible to average next-to-vend beverage
maintain individual standard test
temperature, which means the spatial
packages in the next-to-vend beverage
average temperature of all standard test
positions within 36 °F ± 1 °F for some
packages in the next-to-vend beverage
equipment designs due to spatial
positions at a given time. To clarify,
variability within the unit. In addition,
using the previously discussed
DOE agrees with Coca-Cola’s remarks
nomenclature, the instantaneous
that even an instantaneous spatial
average next-to-vend beverage
average of all standard test packages in
temperature is calculated as follows:
the next-to-vend beverage locations may
not be feasible to maintain throughout
the entire test period due to temporal
temperature variability resulting from
defrost cycles or other compressor
Where:
procedure by explicitly stating that the
temperature of next-to-vend beverages
shall be averaged across all next-to-vend
beverages and over the entire time of the
test, resulting in a single value of 36 °F
± 1 °F. Specifically, to clarify this
requirement, DOE proposed to
incorporate a definition of integrated
average temperature and define this
term as the average of all standard test
package measurements in the next-tovend beverage positions taken during
the test, expressed in degrees Fahrenheit
(°F). 79 FR at 46915. That is, the
integrated average temperature is
calculated as follows:
45769
45770
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
packages must be placed in the
refrigerated compartment(s) in the
following locations, as shown in Figure
III.1:
1) For odd-number shelves, when
counting starting from the bottom shelf,
standard test packages shall be placed
at:
a) the left-most next-to-vend product
location,
b) the right-most next-to-vend product
location, and
c) for equipment with greater than or
equal to five product locations on each
shelf, the next-to-vend product location
in the center of the shelf (i.e.,
equidistant from the left-most and rightmost next-to-vend product locations) if
there are an odd number of next-to-vend
products on the shelf or the next-tovend product location immediately to
the right and to the left of the center
position if there are an even number of
next-to-vend products on the shelf.
2) For even-numbered shelves, when
counting from the bottom shelf,
standard test packages shall be placed at
either:
a) for equipment with less than or
equal to six next-to-vend product
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend
product location(s) 10 (1) one location
towards the center from the left-most
next-to-vend product location and (2)
one location towards the center from the
right-most next-to-vend product
location, or
b) for equipment with greater than six
next-to-vend product locations on each
shelf, the next-to-vend product locations
(1) two locations towards the center
from the left-most next-to-vend product
location and (2) two locations toward
the center from the right-most next-tovend product location.
As beverage vending machines with
products arranged vertically, in stacks,
typically have far fewer next-to-vend
beverage locations, DOE has determined
that such a sampling procedure is not
necessary for this equipment.
8. Defining ‘‘Fully Cooled’’
10 For equipment with three next-to-vend product
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product
location one location towards the center from the
left-most next-to-vend product location is the same
position as the next-to-vend product location one
location towards the center from the right-most
next-to-vend product location.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The 2009 BVM final rule established
DOE energy conservation standards for
beverage vending machines in two
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
ER31JY15.022</GPH>
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
standard test packages should be
reasonably consistent. DOE also notes
that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is, similarly,
considering changing the requirements
for loading standard test packages in
equipment with horizontal product
arrangement to reduce the required
number of standard test packages.
Therefore, consistent with the
submitted comments from interested
parties and the potential changes
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering, DOE
is amending the requirements for
placement of standard test packages for
beverage vending machines with
products arranged horizontally in this
final rule. In particular, DOE is
specifying in section 2.2.1 of
Appendices A and B that, for
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines with products
arranged horizontally (e.g., on shelves or
in product spirals), standard test
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
equipment classes: Class A and Class B
refrigerated beverage vending machines.
74 FR 44914, 44968 (Aug. 31, 2009). The
distinguishing criterion between these
two equipment classes is whether the
equipment is fully cooled. 10 CFR
431.292.
DOE regulations, however, have never
defined the term ‘‘fully cooled.’’ In the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
proposed to define ‘‘fully cooled’’ as a
condition in which the refrigeration
system of a beverage vending machine
cools products throughout the entire
refrigerated volume of a machine
instead of being directed at a fraction (or
zone) of the refrigerated volume as
measured by the average temperature of
the standard test packages in the
furthest from the next-to-vend product
locations, which would be required to
be no more than 10 °F above the
integrated average temperature of the
standard test packages in the next-tovend product locations. 79 FR 46908,
46916 (Aug. 11, 2014).
The proposed definition was
predicated upon the different methods
of cooling used in Class A and Class B
machines and the customer utility
provided by fully cooling the
refrigerated space. Maintaining all
refrigerated beverages within 10 °F of
the next-to-vend beverage temperature
typically allows customers to select
from more beverages and ensures that
the customer will receive a properly
cooled product, regardless of the
product’s vertical location in the
machine. 79 FR at 46915–46917. DOE
selected a temperature range of 10 °F,
based on feedback from manufacturers,
as a reasonable temperature bound to
differentiate fully cooled beverage
vending machines. DOE also verified
this proposed temperature range based
on limited testing of beverage vending
machines currently available on the
market to determine the typical
temperature variability observed
between the next-to-vend and furthest
from next-to-vend beverages in Class A
and Class B equipment, respectively. Id.
To accompany DOE’s proposed
definition of fully cooled, the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR also proposed to
adopt an optional test method that
could be used to quantitatively
differentiate between Class A and Class
B equipment. To confirm whether a
given BVM model is fully cooled, DOE
proposed that temperature
measurements be taken at the next-tovend and furthest from next-to-vend
temperature positions to confirm the
proposed 10 °F temperature differential.
For beverage vending machines with
horizontal product rows, or spirals,
DOE’s proposed test procedure required
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
a standard test package at the back of
the horizontal product rows in the four
corners of the machine (e.g., bottom
right, bottom left, top right, and top left).
For beverage vending machines with
standard products configured in a
vertical stack, the proposal included an
additional standard test package at the
top of each stack. To determine if a
given beverage vending machine is fully
cooled, manufacturers would calculate
the average temperature of the standard
test packages in the furthest from the
next-to-vend product location over the
entire test period and compare that
value to the integrated average
temperature of standard test packages in
the next-to-vend beverage positions. If
the difference between these two values
was less than or equal to 10 °F, the
tested unit would be considered fully
cooled. 79 FR at 46917.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE noted that this test method
would not be required to certify
equipment, but would be the method
used by DOE to determine the
appropriate equipment class for
enforcement purposes. Therefore, DOE
noted that its proposed definition and
test method would not require
manufacturers to take any additional
temperature measurements beyond what
is currently specified in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010 and, as such, would
not increase the burden associated with
conducting the DOE BVM test
procedure. Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE requested comments on its
proposed definition of ‘‘fully cooled’’
and the proposed fully cooled
validation test method. DOE was
particularly interested in whether the
proposed definition aligns with the
classifications of Class A and Class B
equipment currently used in industry.
Id.
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated they are
considering the removal of product class
definitions from the new ASHRAE test
method. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011
at p. 3) Coca-Cola commented that
configurations such as ‘‘zone cooled’’
and ‘‘fully cooled’’ did not apply to the
test method, but to how the machine
was rated. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.4)
Similarly, SVA commented that two
classifications for beverage vending
machines were not needed. (SVA, No.
0008 at p. 2) SVA also suggested that
DOE use the same test procedure for
both classes. (SVA, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 50–55)
In response to the definition of ‘‘fully
cooled’’ proposed in the BVM test
procedure NOPR, several interested
parties recommended that DOE consider
an alternate differentiation between
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45771
equipment types to better capture
differences in energy consumption, and
suggested the presence of a transparent
or opaque front and the arrangement of
products within the machine as
potential differentiating criteria that are
more appropriate and consistent with
the differentiation between equipment
configurations applied in industry. (CA
IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 1; Sanden Vendo
America Inc., Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 52). Many
interested parties also commented
regarding the difficulty of establishing a
quantitative temperature threshold to
differentiate fully cooled equipment
from non-fully cooled equipment that
would be applicable across all BVM
models. (AMS, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 54; SVA, No.
0008 at p. 2; NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 1).
Coca-Cola and SVA also noted the
potential for additional burden
associated with the fully cooled
verification test procedure. (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 4; SVA, No. 0008 at p.
2)
DOE considered all the comments
received regarding the classification of
beverage vending machines based on
the definition of ‘‘fully cooled.’’ In light
of the extent and scope of the comments
received in response to the amendments
proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR regarding the proposed
definition of fully cooled, alternative
criteria for differentiating Class A and
Class B equipment, and the optional
fully cooled verification test protocol,
DOE wishes to further consider
potential classification options and
criteria suggested by interested parties.
As such, DOE will respond to these
comments raised by interested parties
and propose an alternative approach as
a part of the associated ongoing energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
(Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–
0022)). This approach will provide
interested parties an additional
opportunity to provide DOE with
feedback and suggestions regarding the
appropriate classification criteria and
definitions for Class A and Class B
beverage vending machines.
9. Placement of Thermocouples During
Testing
The DOE test procedure established
by the 2006 BVM test procedure final
rule does not specify how to position
thermocouple wires during testing. In
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to clarify that, in order to
avoid compromising the thermal
integrity of the vending machine,
thermocouple wires should not be run
through the dispensing door. Instead,
the wires should be fed through the
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45772
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
door gasket, as it will mold around them
and maintain a better thermal seal for
the cooled compartment. DOE proposed
to add text to the BVM test procedure
in Appendices A and B specifying that
sensors shall be installed in a manner
that does not affect energy performance.
Specifically, DOE proposed to amend
the regulatory text to require that
thermocouple wires be run through the
door gasket and not through the
dispensing door of the beverage vending
machine such that the sensor pathway
is sealed to prohibit airflow between the
interior refrigerated volume and the
ambient room air. 79 FR 46908, 46917–
46918 (Aug. 11, 2014).
In response to DOE’s proposal
regarding the routing of temperature
sensors and associated wiring, AMS,
SVA, Royal Vendors, and Crane
Merchandising Systems (CMS)
commented at the NOPR public meeting
they should be able to route
thermocouples using whatever method
was best for their machine, including
destructive methods such as drilling
holes. (AMS, No. 0004 at pp. 59–62;
SVA, No. 0004 at pp. 62–63; Royal
Vendors, No. 0004 at pp. 63–64; CMS,
No. 0004 at p. 65) Royal Vendors
emphasized that the routing method
used by other manufactures would not
work for their machines and noted that
they route thermocouple wire through a
removable panel in the base of the
machine where the refrigerant lines
enter the machine. (Royal Vendors, No.
0004 at pp. 63–64) CMS suggested that
DOE did not need to provide specificity
as to the placement of thermocouples
for testing beyond requiring that they be
routed in a manner to reduce airflow
and not run through the dispensing
door. (CMS, No. 0004 at p. 65) AMS
suggested that manufacturers could
provide documentation with their
certification reports regarding the
method that was used to route
thermocouples when testing the
beverage vending machine to establish
the certified rating. AMS also
recommended that DOE use the same
method used by manufacturers when
conducting enforcement testing to
ensure consistent results. (AMS, No.
0004 at pp. 59–61) SVA also
recommended DOE consider the
reduction of thermocouple placements
in Class A ‘‘shelf style’’ beverage
vending machines in order to reduce the
effects of airflow caused by
thermocouple wire routing. (SVA, No.
0008 at p. 1)
DOE considered all the comments
received regarding the placement of
thermocouples during testing.
Manufacturers commented that many
methods may be used to route
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
thermocouples and DOE should not
limit the allowable methods, since some
methods are more feasible than the
others based on the specific equipment
design. However, DOE acknowledges
that without specific, verifiable
requirements, it is difficult to ensure
testing is conducted in accordance with
any such test procedure requirement.
This is an issue both for certification
testing, and for ensuring repeatability of
test results in DOE assessment and
enforcement testing.
As such, in this final rule, DOE
maintains that the thermocouple wires
should not be run through dispensing
doors compromising the thermal
integrity of the equipment, but instead
should be run through the door gasket
or other alternate routes that would not
affect the performance of the machine.
DOE is adopting requirements regarding
routing of thermocouples and other
sensor wires in section 2.2.2 of
Appendices A and B.
DOE does not intend to limit the
manner in which manufacturers could
route thermocouple wire when
conducting certification testing and will
continue to allow manufacturers to use
whatever method they deem
appropriate, including drilling holes in
the side of the beverage vending
machine through which the
thermocouple wire can be routed and
caulked in place to limit airflow.
However, DOE notes that, even with
precise documentation, it may be
difficult to repeat exactly what was
done by manufacturers during
certification testing. Further, DOE does
not typically employ methods that
require physical destruction or
permanent modification of the unit
when conducting assessment or
enforcement testing. Therefore, when
testing a BVM model during assessment
or enforcement testing, DOE will route
thermocouple wire through the door
gasket such that the malleable gasket
material is compressed around the
thermocouple wire to ensure a good seal
and prohibiting airflow between the
interior refrigerated volume and the
ambient test chamber air. If a
manufacturer uses a specific method for
routing of the thermocouple wires
during their own certification testing, it
must document these specific steps as
part of the test data records maintained
by the manufacturer in accordance with
10 CFR 429.71.
10. Establishing Testing Provisions at
the Lowest Application Product
Temperature
The DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines requires that an
average next-to-vend temperature of 36
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
°F ± 1 °F be maintained throughout the
test, as discussed in section III.A.7 of
this final rule. While DOE recognizes
that the majority of covered beverage
vending machines can be tested at the
established rating temperature of 36 °F,
DOE is aware of some unique BVM
models that are designed to operate
much higher than 36 °F and cannot
operate at 36 °F, and thus cannot be
tested in accordance with the DOE test
procedure. Manufacturers of such
equipment currently must request a test
procedure waiver to comply with DOE’s
energy conservation standards in
accordance with 10 CFR 431.401.11
Therefore, in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE proposed
amendments to its test procedure for
beverage vending machines to allow
covered beverage vending machines that
cannot achieve an average next-to-vend
temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F to instead
be tested at their lowest application
product temperature. 79 FR 46908,
46418 (Aug. 11, 2014).
DOE proposed that the lowest
application product temperature would
describe the lowest temperature at
which a beverage vending machine
model is capable of maintaining next-tovend beverages and could correspond to
the lowest setting on a unit’s thermostat.
For beverage vending machines that
cannot maintain an average next-tovend temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F, the
lowest application product temperature
provision would specify a revised
average beverage temperature for
beverages in the next-to-vend product
location, but would not modify any
other requirements of the DOE test
procedure. Equipment tested and
certified using the lowest application
product temperature would be required
to meet the standard applicable for its
equipment class and refrigerated
volume, and the manufacturer would be
required to maintain records of the
lowest application product temperature
at which a given model was rated. Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE requested comments on its
proposal to adopt a lowest application
product temperature provision for
covered beverage vending machines that
cannot be tested at the specified average
next-to-vend temperature of 36 °F ± 1
°F.
DOE received several comments on
the applicability of establishing testing
provisions at the lowest application
product temperature. AMS and SVA
11 DOE issued a final rule amending its
regulations governing petitions for waiver and
interim waiver from DOE test procedures for
consumer products and commercial and industrial
equipment. 79 FR 26591 (May 9, 2014). This final
rule was effective on June 9, 2014.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
noted that all their machines can meet
the 36 °F requirement. (CMS, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 75–
76; SVA, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
0004 at pp. 71–72) However, AMS
commented that they have machines
where the lowest temperature setting is
40 °F and special software is required to
set the system at 36 °F. (AMS, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 71)
DOE received several comments in
support of the proposed lowest
application product temperature
provision. Specifically, Coca-Cola
agreed with DOE that the lowest
application temperature should be used
only when the average next-to-vend
temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F could not
be achieved; in cases where 36 °F could
not be achieved, the ‘‘lowest application
temperature’’ should be the average
temperature for which a ±1 °F tolerance
is maintained for steady state operation.
However, Coca-Cola added that the
lowest application product temperature
should not be based on the thermostat
set point, but instead should be based
on the lowest temperature the case is
designed to operate at as specified by
the manufacturer. Coca-Cola further
commented that lowest application
product temperature should only be
applicable to cases that cannot operate
as cold as 36 °F ± 1 °F; it should not be
applicable to machines designed to
vend frozen products such as ice or ice
cream. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 5)
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 also supported
DOE’s proposal to adopt a lowest
application product temperature
provision for covered beverage vending
machines that cannot be tested at the
specified average next-to-vend
temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F, but
recommends that the scope be limited to
beverage vending machines only, and
not machines designed exclusively to
vend snacks or other perishable
products. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011
at p. 3)
CA IOUs also expressed their support
of the alternative lowest application
product temperature provision for
beverage vending machines that cannot
be tested at 36 °F, but suggested that the
test procedure include a requirement for
the manufacturer to indicate the
temperature at which the beverage
vending machine was tested. (CA IOUs,
No. 0005 at p. 2)
SVA disagreed with DOE’s proposal
to test units at the lowest application
temperature, but noted that if allowed,
the product should be identified within
a different classification, and the
temperature must be clearly labeled on
the machine and identified in the DOE
listing. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) CMS also
suggested that a new class of equipment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
be introduced for models that cannot
meet the 36 °F requirement to help
people differentiate energy efficient
models from those that are not tested at
the 36 °F requirement. (CMS, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 77–
80) NEEA commented that beverage
vending machines that do not go down
to 36 °F may pass the DOE test but be
‘‘energy hogs.’’ (NEEA, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 72–75) CocaCola commented that refrigerated
vending machines which had their
lowest applicable product temperature
substantially higher than 36 °F were
likely not beverage vending machines
and that they should therefore not be
included in this test procedure, but
instead receive some alternative
treatment. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 5)
Regarding how to determine the
lowest application product temperature
for applicable equipment, AMS
recommended that the lowest
application product temperature be
determined by actual measurement
when the machine is operating at its
lowest temperature. (AMS, No. 0007 at
p. 4) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that the
lowest thermostat setting would be a
reasonable approach for most
equipment, but emphasized that the
reported lowest application product
temperature should be the integrated
average temperature measurement, not
the thermostat set point. (ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3) NEEA suggested
that a proportional method of scaling
the allowable energy consumption
based on the change in temperature
could be used for equipment that cannot
reach the 36 °F requirement. (NEEA,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at
pp. 82–83) SVA commented that
determining energy use can be more
complicated than just proportional
scaling. (SVA, No. 0004–1 at p. 84)
Coca-Cola commented that testing a
beverage vending machine by the
proposed clarifications of Appendix A
would render different test results from
the current test method due to changes
in temperatures and the treatment of
accessories. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.
1)
DOE considered all comments
submitted by interested parties
regarding testing at the lowest
application product temperature.
Commenters generally agreed with
DOE’s proposal to test equipment that
cannot be operated at an integrated
average temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F at
the lowest application product
temperature, and stated that the
manufacturer should be required to
record the integrated average
temperature at which the machine is
rated. Thus, in this final rule, DOE is
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45773
adopting provisions in section 2.1.3 of
Appendices A and B to test beverage
vending machines that cannot be
operated at an average next-to-vend
temperature of 36 °F ± 1 °F to instead
be tested at their lowest application
product temperature, as proposed in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
Some commenters also mentioned
that machines tested at the lowest
application product temperature should
be identified in a different classification,
and that the temperature should be
identified on the label and in the DOE
listing. DOE notes that DOE’s proposal
regarding the lowest application
product temperature test provisions
included a requirement to report the
lowest application product temperature
of a BVM basic model to DOE in the
BVM basic model’s certification report.
In this final rule, DOE is also specifying
that equipment tested and certified
using the lowest application product
temperature will be required to meet the
standard applicable for its equipment
class and refrigerated volume. DOE
acknowledges that it will be easier for
such equipment to meet the applicable
energy conservation standard, as the
energy use of beverage vending
machines is a function of the
temperature differential between the
refrigerated temperature and the
ambient conditions. Since the lowest
application product temperature test
provisions require a higher integrated
average temperature, the measured DEC
would be lower than a similar case
tested at 36 °F ± 1 °F. DOE reiterates that
the lowest application product
temperature test provisions are only
applicable to equipment that cannot be
operated at 36 °F ± 1 °F and, as such,
believes such test provisions will only
be applicable to a small number of
models. Therefore, DOE does not
believe separate standards for such
equipment are justified. In response to
NEEA’s proposal to scale the applicable
MDEC based on the temperature
differential between the tested lowest
application product temperature and the
specified rating temperature of 36 °F,
DOE agrees with SVA that determining
the appropriate energy conservation
standard level can be more complicated
than just proportional scaling. For
example, fixed energy consuming
components, such as lighting and
display signage, will not scale based on
the temperature differential between the
refrigerated compartment and the
ambient air. However, DOE will monitor
the number of models certifying under
the lowest application product
temperature provisions and, if a
significant portion or increase in BVM
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45774
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
models using such provisions is
observed, take any necessary corrective
action at that time.
DOE agrees with Coca-Cola and
ASHRAE SPC 32.1’s comment that the
lowest application product temperature
provisions should be limited to
refrigerated beverage vending machines
that operate warmer than 36 °F ± 1 °F
and not freezers or other categories of
equipment that are not intended to vend
sealed beverages, since beverage
vending machines are limited to
commercial refrigerators. DOE notes that
this test procedure and the lowest
application product temperature
provisions are only applicable to
equipment that meets DOE’s definition
of refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machine; namely
equipment that (1) is a commercial
refrigerator, (2) refrigerates sealed
beverages and (3) dispenses such sealed
beverages on payment. 10 CFR 431.292.
In the 2014 commercial refrigeration
equipment test procedure final rule,
DOE adopted a new definition of
commercial refrigerator, defined as a
unit of commercial refrigeration
equipment in which all refrigerated
compartments in the unit are capable of
operating at or above 32 °F ± 2 °F. 79
FR 22278, 22307–22308 (April 21,
2014). DOE has determined that this
definition is also applicable to beverage
vending machines. As such, to clarify
that DOE’s BVM test procedure and
energy conservation standards only
apply to refrigerated equipment and not
freezers that operate below 32 °F, in this
final rule, DOE is amending the
definition of refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine to
explicitly reference the definition of
commercial refrigerator located at 10
CFR 431.62. DOE notes that amending
the definition of a refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine is
necessary since the term ‘‘commercial
refrigerator’’ is referenced in the existing
definition, but the definition did not
explicitly establish that the term
‘‘commercial refrigerator’’ refers to that
defined under subpart C to part 431 of
title 10 of the CFR, which pertains to
commercial refrigeration equipment.
DOE believes this effectively responds
to Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1’s
comments as, in DOE’s view, it is
extremely unlikely that a beverage
vending machine would be unable to
operate at 36 °F ± 1 °F and still be able
to operate at or above 32 °F ± 2 °F. A
beverage vending machine that operates
only between 32 and 34 °F, however
unlikely, would meet DOE’s definition
of refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machine. In such a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
case, the beverage vending machine
could be rated under the lowest
application product temperature
provision, as adopted, and the lowest
application product temperature
provision would be 34 °F.
DOE acknowledges ASHRAE SPC
32.1’s affirmation of DOE’s proposal that
the lowest application product
temperature should be determined for
equipment with thermostats by the
lowest thermostat setting. In response to
Coca-Cola’s comment that the lowest
application product temperature should
not be based on the thermostat set point,
but instead should be based on the
lowest temperature the case is designed
to operate at as specified by the
manufacturer, DOE notes that such a
requirement may be difficult to enforce
and could create a loophole whereby
equipment could advertise temperatures
above 38 °F, but be able to operate as
cold as 36 °F in the field. Therefore, in
this final rule, DOE is electing to
maintain the specification that, for
equipment with a thermostat, the
reported lowest application product
temperature is the actual measured
integrated average temperature when
the thermostat is set at its lowest setting
and not the reading on the thermostat,
as suggested by ASHRAE and AMS. As
DOE did not receive any comments on
the specification of the lowest
application product temperature for
equipment without thermostats, DOE is
not including any additional specificity
in determining the lowest application
product temperature for such equipment
at this time. However, DOE notes that
documentation supporting the
determination of the LAPT should be
included as part of the test data records
maintained by the manufacturer in
accordance with 10 CFR 429.71
underlying certification.
Regarding Coca-Cola’s comment that
testing using the lowest application
product temperature may have an
impact on the measured DEC, DOE
acknowledges that changes in the
integrated average temperature of the
interior refrigerated volume will alter
the measured DEC of BVM models.
However, as stated earlier, DOE notes
that such a provision is only applicable
to equipment that cannot operate at 36
°F ± 1 °F and DOE believes this
represents very few models. Also, under
the BVM test procedure adopted in the
2006 BVM test procedure final rule,
such equipment would be required to
apply for a waiver, since it currently
cannot be tested. To date, DOE has not
received any waiver requests regarding
BVM models that cannot operate at the
appropriate rating temperature.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
With respect to the comment from
AMS that some models may be
produced such that the lowest
temperature setting is greater than the
test temperature specified by the DOE
test procedure and special software is
required to set the system at 36 °F, DOE
notes that all beverage vending
machines must be tested and certified as
shipped and designed for use in the
field. Therefore the use of specific
controls designed solely for use when
testing the equipment that are not
available to a purchaser or operator of
the equipment would not be allowed in
the DOE test procedure. If the machine,
as distributed in commerce, is unable to
meet the temperature requirements of
the DOE test procedure, then the
machine would be tested using its
lowest application product temperature
as discussed in section III.A.10 of this
final rule.
11. Treatment of Certain Accessories
During Testing
In reviewing the DOE test procedure
for beverage vending machines, DOE
recognized that the existing test
procedure does not clearly specify the
appropriate operation of some
components and accessories when
conducting the test procedure. DOE
understands that there is room for
various interpretations of the
requirements for equipment
configuration where the DOE test
procedure is currently ambiguous or
silent. In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify the
proper configuration and operation of
several specific components and
accessories in the DOE test procedure to
remove this ambiguity and improve the
repeatability of the DOE test procedure.
79 FR 46908, 46919–46922 (Aug. 11,
2014).
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify that, in
general, any accessory or component
that is integral to the intended operation
of the beverage vending machine must
be operational during the test. In this
context, DOE interpreted ‘‘integral’’ to
mean necessary for operation of the
BVM model in a manner that meets the
DOE definition of beverage vending
machine—i.e., necessary for the BVM
model to cool bottled or canned
beverages and/or dispense bottled or
canned beverages on payment. In
addition, DOE proposed to clarify that
any manually controllable energyconsuming accessories that are integral
to the performance of the BVM
refrigeration system must be in place
during testing if offered for sale with
that basic model and must be tested at
the most energy-consuming setting. DOE
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
also proposed that accessories that are
controlled by automatic controls and are
not configurable by the BVM operator
must be tested in the automatic state. Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to clarify these
requirements by adding language in
Appendices A and B regarding the
appropriate treatment of components
and accessories during testing. 79 FR at
46935, 46937.
In addition to these general
requirements, DOE believed it would be
clearer and more precise to specify, to
the extent possible, the appropriate
treatment of several common
components and accessories that might
typically be found on beverage vending
machines. Therefore, in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR, DOE also
proposed to include provisions
regarding the treatment of 11 specific
components, including (1) payment
mechanisms; (2) interior lighting; (3)
external customer display signs, lights,
or digital screens; (4) anti-sweat and
other electric resistance heaters; (5)
condensate pan heaters; (6) illuminated
temperature displays; (7) condensate
filters; (8) security covers; (9) coated
coils; (10) general purpose outlets; and
(11) crankcase heaters and electric
resistance heaters for cold weather. 79
FR at 46919–46922, 46935–46938.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE also emphasized that the
proposed clarifications served only to
unambiguously clarify the intent of the
current DOE test procedure and, as
such, would be required for equipment
testing as of 180 days after publication
of this final rule.
In response to DOE’s proposed
treatment of accessories in general, DOE
received multiple comments regarding
the treatment of accessories not
discussed explicitly in section III.A.11
of the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR
and their configuration during testing.
ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Coca-Cola, and
California IOUs agreed with DOE that
the test procedure should include
components required to maintain the
primary operation of the machine to
represent field performance, including
components used for maintaining
product temperatures, accepting
payment, allowing user selection of
product, and vending product during
testing. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at
p. 4; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7; CA
IOUs, No. 0005 at p.2) ASHRAE SPC
32.1 listed the following as potential
accessories that could be included on a
beverage vending machine: payment
devices (e.g., coin mechanisms, bill
validators, credit card readers, and
mobile phone payment), ADA
accessibility equipment, screens (e.g.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
product selection touchscreens and pure
advertisement screens), computers that
interface with screens, Wi-Fi routers,
trash compactors, and cold weather
heating elements. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
No. 0011 at pp. 3–4)
AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola also
supported DOE’s proposal in Appendix
A to de-energize accessories nonessential to the vending process and
unnecessary to the machine’s basic
operation and they agreed that such
systems should be on if required for
product selection or vending. However,
they commented that secondary
systems, including secondary payment
systems, should not be required during
testing. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 4–7;
SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 7) Specifically, Coca-Cola
noted that new beverage vending
machines are being developed that
incorporate new capabilities, utilize
additional transformative technologies,
and are more innovative, and they
acknowledged that these additional
services will add to the energy
consumption of the beverage vending
machine in the field. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 8) Coca-Cola provided the
following list of potential accessories
that could be included on a beverage
vending machine: reverse vending
systems for waste management, message
displays and interactive video walls not
necessary for product selection,
television monitors, routers, and
communication systems such as
modems and blue-tooth devices,
consumer award management systems
(that may receive caps or coupons), and
additional secondary payment systems
(e.g., card readers, key-fob readers).
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6) However,
Coca-Cola recommended that these
features not be considered when
establishing a basic rating for the
equipment as a beverage vending
machine. Coca-Cola further
recommended that, if such energy
consumption were to be considered, the
equipment be subject to different
standards that account for the additional
functionality the machines provide.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
AMS noted that they had encountered
beverage vending machines with a wide
variety of accessories, including cell
phone/laptop battery chargers, Wi-Fi
hotspots, reverse vending equipment
(trash compactors), and power assist
features for handicapped consumers, in
addition to the accessories outlined in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
AMS agreed with DOE’s proposal that
such accessories be de-energized or set
to their lowest energy consuming state
during testing under Appendix A.
However, in Appendix B, AMS
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45775
recommended that such accessories
only be de-energized or set to their
lowest energy consuming state if the
BVM controls would cause the
accessories to automatically enter such
states under the conditions of the test.
AMS clarified that, if such accessories
can be configured to operate at all times,
they should be left energized and
operating during the test to capture the
representative field performance of the
unit. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 6–7)
California IOUs agreed with AMS that
the energy consumption of such features
should be captured, and they
recommended that the new test
procedure have provisions for including
new but prevalent accessories like
networking capabilities and large
displays while testing. (CA IOUs, No.
0005 at p.2)
DOE agrees with the comments
received from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, CocaCola, California IOUs, SVA, and AMS
suggesting that the operation of
components necessary to provide the
‘‘primary functionality’’ of the beverage
vending machine as it would be
installed in the field should be
operational during testing. DOE
interprets ‘‘components necessary for
primary functionality’’ to mean the
components necessary to cool products
and vend products on payment.
However, as discussed further in section
III.A.11.a, in response to comments from
SVA, AMS, and Coca-Cola, DOE is also
allowing for flexibility regarding the
treatment of payment mechanisms to
accommodate typical equipment testing
practices in the industry.
DOE is adopting clarifying language
in Appendices A and B specifying that
the rated beverage vending machine
must only include sufficient
functionality necessary for cooling and
vending sealed beverages (except for
payment mechanisms) during testing,
including functionality necessary for
temperature management, product
inventory, product merchandising,
product selection, and product transport
and delivery. Appendices A and B will
further specify that any accessories not
fundamental to the primary operation of
the equipment be de-energized during
testing, or placed in the lowest energy
consuming state if the component
cannot be de-energized without
affecting the fundamental functionality
of the beverage vending machine. That
is, if the accessory or component is
required for the BVM model to cool
bottled or canned beverages and/or
dispense bottled or canned beverages on
payment, then the accessory is required
to be in place and operational during
testing. Accessories such as reverse
vending for waste management, wireless
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45776
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
portals, and other systems that do not
impact the performance of the machine
must be de-energized during testing, or
placed in the lowest energy consuming
state. DOE notes that this language and
approach is consistent with that being
considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1.
DOE believes that testing with only
those devices and accessories necessary
for primary functionality of the beverage
vending machine for its fundamental
purpose of cooling and vending
refrigerated beverages provides a
representative and consistent basis for
comparing the energy performance of
beverage vending machines. DOE
acknowledges the concerns of interested
parties that additional accessories may
increase the energy consumption of
beverage vending machines in the field.
However, as noted by Coca-Cola, these
functions are secondary and tangential
to the functionality of the equipment as
a beverage vending machine. DOE also
agrees with commenters that, given the
number and variety of such potential
accessories, it is more consistent and
straightforward to test equipment with
any such auxiliary features de-energized
or placed in the lowest energy
consuming state.
In response to AMS’s comment that
only those devices that are
automatically placed in their lowest
energy consuming state when installed
and energized be allowed to enter such
a state during testing, DOE believes that
its adopted approach provides the most
representative, repeatable, and
comparable performance for tested BVM
equipment. However, DOE notes that
under Appendix A, any components or
accessories that are controlled by
automatic controls that are permanently
operational and cannot be adjusted by
the machine operator must be operated
in the automatic state, in accordance
with ANSI/ASHRAE 23.1–2010. In
Appendix B, DOE is adopting more
specific treatment for automatic
controls, including both those that can
be adjusted by the machine operator and
those that cannot. DOE’s provisions for
these ‘‘accessory low power mode’’
controls are described further in section
III.B.2.
Coca-Cola also commented that
testing a beverage vending machine
using the proposed clarifications of
Appendix A would render different test
results from the current test method due
to changes in temperatures and
treatment of accessories. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 1)
In response to Coca-Cola’s comment
that the amendments in Appendix A
will affect the measured energy
consumption of refrigerated beverage
vending machines, DOE reiterates that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
the measured energy consumption
under the DOE test procedure is not
affected; the amendments and
clarifications included in Appendix A
serve only to clarify the provisions of
the existing BVM test procedure and
ensure equipment are tested
consistently among manufacturers and
test labs.
The following sections III.A.11.a
through III.A.11.k discuss the proposed
treatment of 11 specific features,
components, and accessories under the
DOE test procedure, as well as any
comments received and the specific
amendments DOE is adopting in this
final rule for those 11 specific
components.
a. Payment Mechanisms
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE stated its belief that
payment mechanisms are integral to the
vending function of the beverage
vending machine and, accordingly,
should be in place and functional
during testing. Specifically, DOE
proposed that when testing a vending
machine, the most energy-consuming
combination of payment mechanisms
should be used. 79 FR 46908, 46919
(Aug. 11, 2014). DOE also noted that all
other BVM models equipped with less
energy-consumptive combinations of
payment mechanisms may be listed as
different individual models covered
under that basic model or as unique
basic models, if manufacturers wish to
certify and make representations
regarding the energy use of each
combination of money processing
equipment. Id.
In response to DOE’s proposal, AMS
objected to the inclusion of any money
processing accessories as part of
Appendix A or Appendix B during
testing based on the fact that beverage
vending machines usually are not
shipped with these accessories and that
most, if not all, of the BVM
manufacturers currently omit these
accessories while testing. (AMS, No.
0007 at pp. 4–5) SVA urged DOE to not
consider payment mechanisms during
testing because of the large number of
variations involved, keeping the
baseline more consistent across models
and manufacturers. (SVA, No. 0008 at p.
2) AMS and SVA also noted that
including payment mechanisms would
make the testing process burdensome, as
there are a large number of different
models and manufacturers of these
money processing accessories. (AMS,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at
pp. 120–121; SVA, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 121–122 and
SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) Coca-Cola
commented that machines are typically
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
sold without payment systems and
disagreed with DOE’s analysis that the
most energy-consuming combination of
payment mechanisms be used for the
test. Additionally, Coca-Cola noted that
manufacturers had standard payment
systems for machines, and
recommended that the standard
payment systems be used for the test.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7)
Conversely, NEEA commented that the
test procedure should include payment
mechanisms, as this reflects field
conditions. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 2)
During the public meeting, SVA and
NEEA suggested that payment
mechanisms should be included as part
of Appendix B only. (SVA, No. 0004 at
pp. 121–122; NEEA, No. 0004 at pp.
122–123)
DOE considered all comments
received regarding the treatment of
payment mechanisms in developing the
provisions adopted in this final rule.
DOE agrees with the comment from
NEEA that payment mechanisms should
be included in the test procedure to
reflect field conditions. However, DOE
understands that due to the wide variety
of available payment mechanism
combinations, determining and testing
with the most energy-consuming
combination of payment mechanisms
may be burdensome for manufacturers.
DOE realizes that, as beverage vending
machines are often sold or shipped
without payment mechanisms in place,
BVM manufacturers may not have
control or knowledge of the payment
mechanism that may be installed in the
field and, as such, selecting the most
energy-consuming combination, as
originally proposed by DOE, may not be
feasible.
Based on the comments submitted by
interested parties, DOE considered
several options to account for the energy
use of payment the mechanisms. Given
that payment mechanisms are variable
and are not always included in the
machine at the time of sale, DOE
understands that it is difficult to
unambiguously specify a
‘‘representative’’ payment mechanism or
device combination that would be
applicable to all BVM basic models and
consistent across all units of each
model. With this in mind, DOE believes
that conducting physical testing of
beverage vending machines with no
payment mechanisms installed, as
opposed to testing with the payment
mechanisms in place, is the most
straightforward, repeatable, and
unambiguous approach. DOE notes that
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is also currently
considering updating ASHRAE 32.1 to
specify that testing be performed
without payment mechanisms installed.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
However, DOE maintains that
payment mechanisms are integral to the
vending function of the beverage
vending machine and, therefore,
represent part of the primary
functionality of the beverage vending
machine, as discussed in III.A.11.
Accordingly, DOE believes that it is
important for the energy consumption of
a payment mechanism to be captured in
the DEC of a beverage vending machine.
To provide a standardized and
consistent method of accounting for
payment mechanism energy
consumption when a BVM model is
being tested without such a device or
devices installed, DOE is specifying a
default energy consumption value for
payment mechanisms that will be added
to the tested primary rated energy
consumption per day (ED) shown in
section 7.2.3.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1–
2010 to determine the DEC of tested
equipment.
To determine the default payment
mechanism energy consumption value
that would be representative of the
typical energy consumption of such
devices in the field, DOE conducted a
search of available payment
mechanisms for beverage vending
machines and their respective published
power or energy consumption values.
Through this search, DOE found 25
different models of payment
mechanisms: 11 coin mechanisms, 11
bill validators, and 3 credit card readers.
DOE found that coin mechanisms have
an average idle mode power
consumption of 7.1W, while bill
validators have an average idle mode
power consumption of 6.8W and credit
card readers have an average idle mode
power consumption of 12W. DOE
referenced the idle mode energy
consumption of these devices because
no vending occurs during the BVM test
procedure.
DOE calculated the average daily
energy consumption for each device
category based on the average power
consumption estimates for each of the
three payment mechanism categories.
DOE estimates that coin mechanisms
consume approximately 0.17 kWh/day,
bill validators consume approximately
0.16 kWh/day, and credit card readers
consume approximately 0.29 kWh/day.
DOE notes that these values are
representative of the amount of energy
such devices would consume if
installed on a beverage vending
machine tested in accordance with the
DOE test procedure. After considering
these representative energy
consumption values and the variability
in the payment mechanism available to
the manufacturer to install in the
machine, DOE weighted the average
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
daily energy consumption of the three
most comment payment mechanisms.
Since credit card readers are often
leased from a separate company, the
energy consumption of coin
mechanisms and bill validators were
weighted more heavily than the energy
consumption of credit card readers.
After weighting the representative
energy consumption values, DOE
determined that a default daily energy
consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day is
an appropriate representative value for
the energy consumption associated with
payment mechanisms. This value is also
representative of a worst-case coin
mechanism or bill validator because it is
higher than the average energy
consumption of the coin mechanisms or
bill validators. DOE acknowledges that
any given BVM basic model may have
a payment mechanism or combination
of payment mechanisms that uses more
or less energy than this default value
when installed in the field. However, for
the purposes of rating equipment based
on testing conducted in accordance with
the DOE test procedure, the beverage
vending machine shall be tested without
any payment mechanism installed (or
with any existing payment mechanisms
de-energized or set to the lowest energy
consuming state, if it cannot be deenergized) and the DEC rating shall be
determined as the sum of the measured
primary daily energy consumption per
day and the default payment
mechanism energy consumption value
(0.20 kWh/day). Any representations
regarding the energy consumption of
equipment rated under this approach
must be made based on this calculated
DEC, regardless of the payment
mechanism or combination of payment
mechanisms with which any given BVM
unit is actually sold.
Regarding the comment from CocaCola that manufacturers may wish to
test with standard payment systems for
the beverage vending machines they
produce, DOE wishes to clarify that
manufacturers must make
representations regarding the energy
consumption of beverage vending
machines based on the testing and
calculations performed under the DOE
test procedure. DOE surveyed many
BVM manufacturers and payment
mechanism manufacturers regarding the
existence of any default or ‘‘standard’’
payment mechanism device and was not
able to identify one that was applicable
to all BVM manufacturers and models.
As such, DOE is instead adopting an
approach whereby beverage vending
machines that differ only based on
number and type of payment
mechanism may be certified under a
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45777
single basic model listing based on the
tested energy consumption of the BVM
model with no payment mechanism
installed (or the payment mechanism
de-energized or set to the lowest energy
consuming state, if it cannot be deenergized) plus the 0.20 kWh/day
default energy consumption value for
payment mechanisms.
In response to SVA and NEEA’s
suggestion that DOE include the energy
consumption of payment mechanisms
in Appendix B only, DOE reiterates its
belief that money processing is an
integral part of the primary functionality
of the beverage vending machine,
namely the vending function. DOE
disagrees that the current test procedure
does not include the energy
consumption of the payment
mechanisms. In fact, the current DOE
test procedure for BVMs at 10 CFR
431.294(b) requires testing in
accordance with the test procedures
specified in section 4, ‘‘Instruments,’’
section 5, ‘‘Vending Machine Capacity,’’
section 6, ‘‘Test Conditions,’’ and
sections 7.1 through 7.2.3.2, under ‘‘Test
Procedures,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2004, ‘‘Methods of
Testing for Rating Vending Machines for
Bottled, Canned, and Other Sealed
Beverages.’’ (Incorporated by reference,
see § 431.293). More specifically, ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004 states that
the machine shall be ‘‘installed in
accordance with the manufacturer’s
instructions’’ and ‘‘operated with
normal lighting and control settings,
using only those energy management
controls that are permanently
operational and not capable of being
adjusted by a machine operator’’
(7.1.1(a) and (d), respectively). DOE has
interpreted these provisions of the test
procedure as requiring the BVM to be
tested with the payment mechanism as
it would be installed in the field. As
such, DOE is continuing to require
testing of beverage vending machines in
a manner that accounts for the energy
consumption of all features that
contribute to the primary functionality
of the beverage vending machine,
including payment mechanisms, in both
Appendix A and Appendix B. Given the
comment we received in response to
DOE’s proposal in the NOPR, DOE
believes that it is important to clarify
and streamline the applicability of the
current test procedure provisions in
Appendix A to reduce burden on
manufacturers. Consequently, DOE is
adopting a streamlined method of
calculating and including the energy use
with a typical payment system in
sections 2.2.3.1 and 2.3 of Appendix A
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45778
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
and sections 2.2.5.1 and 2.3 of
Appendix B.
b. Interior Lighting
Beverage vending machines typically
include lighting to illuminate the
vendible products, in the case of Class
A equipment, or illuminate display
panels that are part of the physical walls
of the beverage vending machine, in the
case of Class B equipment. In both
cases, these lights are internal to the
physical walls of the beverage vending
machine and, thus, are deemed integral
to the operation of the equipment.
Through incorporation of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004, the DOE
test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM
test procedure final rule currently
requires beverage vending machines to
be tested with ‘‘normal lighting and
control settings.’’ The revised ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010 includes
the same requirement.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE recognized that this
requirement could be interpreted
differently in various circumstances
and, as such, proposed to amend the
regulatory text to clarify the treatment of
internal lighting when conducting the
DOE test procedure. Specifically, DOE
proposed an amendment to the
regulatory text stating that lighting that
is contained within, or is part of the
physical boundary of, the beverage
vending machine established by the top,
bottom, and side panels of the
equipment be placed in its maximum
energy consuming state, as DOE believes
that the maximum energy consuming
state is consistent with the ‘‘normal’’
setting and is the operation most
commonly employed in the field. 79 FR
at 46921.
In response to DOE’s proposal in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, AMS,
SVA, Coca-Cola, and ASHRAE SPC 32.1
supported DOE’s proposal to specify
that internal lighting operation must be
operated in the maximum energyconsuming state during testing. (AMS,
No. 0007 at p. 6; SVA, No. 0008 at p.
2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6; ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3) SVA and
AMS supported DOE’s proposal to
include such clarifications in both
Appendices A and B, and noted that
they both currently test equipment with
the interior lighting in the maximum
energy consuming state. (AMS, No. 0007
at p. 6; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) SVA
further noted that software modes that
shut off the lighting system when not in
use were probably unlawful if used to
influence the outcome of the energy
consumption test. (SVA, No. 0008 at p.
2) Coca-Cola added that many of their
machines employ energy management
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
routines that have an impact on the
lighting of the machine. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 6) However, ASHRAE SPC
32.1 and Coca-Cola cautioned that
machines may have been tested
differently in the past, and the new test
procedure could significantly change
energy consumption values previously
reported. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011
at p. 3; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6)
DOE appreciates comments from
AMS, SVA, Coca-Cola, and ASHRAE
SPC 32.1 supporting DOE’s proposal.
Receiving no negative comments, in this
final rule, DOE is clarifying that interior
lighting that is contained within, or is
part of the physical boundary of the
beverage vending machine established
by the top, bottom, and side panels of
the equipment, shall be placed in its
maximum energy consuming state for
testing.
In response to the comments
submitted by Coca-Cola and ASHRAE
SPC 32.1 noting that previous tests may
have been conducted using methods not
consistent with the provisions DOE is
adopting in this final rule, DOE
reiterates that because the DOE test
procedure was previously silent or
ambiguous on the specific treatment of
some components, it is possible that
some BVM manufacturers
misinterpreted DOE’s test procedure
and, thus, some BVM models were
tested inconsistently. DOE
acknowledges that some BVM models
may require recertification based on
these new clarifications. However, DOE
continues to maintain that the clarified
treatment of interior lighting serves only
to unambiguously clarify the intent of
the DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE
is adding this clarifying language to
section 2.2.3.2 of Appendix A and
section 2.2.5.2 of Appendix B for
certifying equipment in accordance with
existing and any amended energy
conservation standards, respectively.
c. External Customer Display Signs,
Lights, or Digital Screens
In addition to interior lighting,
discussed in section III.A.11.b, DOE
recognizes that some beverage vending
machines may incorporate additional
external customer display signs, lights,
and/or digital screens outside of the
body of the refrigerated BVM cabinet. In
this case, such external customer
display signs, lights, and/or digital
screens are optional and are not integral
to the cabinet, but external customer
display signs, lights, may significantly
increase the energy use of beverage
vending machines that include those
features. However, such external
customer display signs, lights, or digital
screens are not explicitly addressed in
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the DOE test procedure, as adopted in
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule,
or in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–
2004 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2010. In the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to
clarify that customer display signs,
lighting, and digital screens external to
the beverage vending machine and not
integral to the operation of the primary
refrigeration or vending functions (e.g.,
digital screens that are not necessary for
consumers to make a product selection)
may be disabled, disconnected, or
otherwise de-energized. 79 FR at 46920–
46921. However, in the case that the
customer display signs, lighting, or
digital screens are integral to the
functionality of the beverage vending
machine, in that it cannot perform the
primary refrigeration and vending
functions if such equipment is disabled
or removed, DOE clarified that the
integral customer display signs, lighting,
or digital screens should be put in the
lowest energy-consuming state that
maintains primary functionality of the
beverage vending machine. For
example, if a digital screen performs the
vending or money processing function,
that screen would be placed in its
lowest energy-consuming state that still
allows the money processing feature to
function; this would provide equitable
treatment with other payment
mechanisms that must be energized, as
specified in section III.A.11.a. Id.
DOE proposed to include this
clarification in Appendix A, to be used
when certifying equipment under
existing standards, based on the fact that
such external customer display signs,
lights, or digital screens are not
mentioned in the existing DOE test
procedure, as adopted in the 2006 BVM
test procedure final rule, and are
peripheral to the primary functionality
of a beverage vending machine, as
discussed in section III.A.11. DOE also
noted that such treatment is consistent
with interpretation to ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010, which states that
‘‘the Standard (32.1) addresses the
refrigerated/delivery system portion of
the machine. Thus, any peripheral
devices, not necessary for the basic
function of the vending machine are not
addressed by Standard 32.1.’’ Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed similar treatment
for Appendix B, but also proposed to
define a new term, ‘‘standby mode’’ to
more unambiguously specify the state in
which external customer display signs,
lights, and digital screens would be
placed if they cannot be de-energized
without affecting the primary
functionality of the beverage vending
machine under test. DOE proposed to
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
define standby mode as the mode of
operation in which any external,
integral customer display signs, lighting,
or digital screens are connected to main
power, do not produce the intended
illumination, display, or interaction
functionality, and can be switched into
another mode automatically with only a
remote user-generated or an internal
signal. DOE proposed to clarify that, in
Appendix B, that if the external, integral
customer display signs, lighting, or
digital screens do not have a standby
mode, the integral customer display
signs, lighting, or digital screens would
be placed in the lowest energyconsuming state, and, if a digital screen
performs the vending or money
processing function, that screen should
be placed in its lowest energyconsuming state that still allows the
money processing feature to function,
similar to Appendix A. Id.
In response to DOE’s proposed
treatment of external customer display
signs, lights, or digital screens in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, AMS,
SVA, and Coca-Cola supported DOE’s
proposal to de-energize accessories nonessential to the vending process and
unnecessary to the machine’s basic
operation, and agreed that such systems
should be on if required for product
selection or vending. The commenters
supported such a proposal for both
Appendices A and B. (AMS, No. 0007
at pp. 6–7; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; CocaCola, No. 0010 at p. 7) NEEA
commented that capturing the standby
energy usage of integral signage might
drive manufacturers to move to external
signage and discourage integral smart
controls to reduce energy usage of
integral signage. (NEEA, No. 0009 at
p. 2)
DOE appreciates comments from
AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola supporting
DOE’s proposed treatment of external
customer display signs, lighting, and
digital screens. DOE acknowledges
NEEA’s comment regarding the
potential for manufacturers to move to
external signage to avoid accounting for
the standby energy usage of internal
signage, but believes that there is a
limited capacity for them to do so, since
any interior lighting used to illuminate
product or equipment side panels will
inherently be integral to the unit and,
thus, must be operated in the maximum
energy consumption state, as specified
in earlier in this section. The one
example where interior lighting that
must be energized under the DOE test
procedure might have opportunity to be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
replaced by an external display screen
that does not have to be energized under
the DOE test procedure may be on
beverage vending machines that
currently incorporate illuminated side
panels to serve a marketing and
advertising function. The illuminated
side panels could, theoretically, be
replaced by external digital screens.
However, DOE notes that, based on
DOE’s review of existing Class B
equipment, the illuminated side panels
currently available on the market are
typically quite large, covering the entire
side of the beverage vending machine,
and any replacement illuminated sign or
digital screen would likely be
equivalently large. DOE believes that
such large display screens or
individually manufactured external
illuminated signage would be
significantly more expensive than the
current equipment design with interior
lighting and, as such, DOE believes the
likelihood that manufacturers will
migrate to external signage solely to
decrease the measured energy
consumption of their equipment is very
low.
Regarding the proposed definition of
‘‘standby mode’’ in Appendix B, AMS
supported DOE’s proposed definition,
but stated that the list of accessories
should be expanded from external,
integral display signs, lighting, or digital
screens to all accessories that might be
applied to beverage vending machines.
(AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 6–7) NRCan
suggested renaming the standby mode to
‘‘external accessory standby mode’’ for
clarity. (NRCan, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 116) CocaCola suggested an alternative definition.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
Specifically, Coca-Cola suggested the
following definition for standby mode
for beverage vending machines:
‘‘Standby mode is the state that the
vending machine is in when it does not
have to deliver product, is not intended
to deliver product, or cannot be used to
select and purchase a product. In this
mode of operation any powered element
can be in a different state than when the
machine is in normal operation
delivering product to a consumer.
Standby mode can be activated
automatically by programming or by
sensory devices monitoring internal
functions or external conditions and
activity.’’ (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
DOE appreciates the comment from
AMS supporting the definition of the
standby mode for external customer
display signs, lights, or digital screens.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45779
In response to expanding the
applicability of the standby mode
definition, to DOE’s knowledge there are
not any other accessories that the
definition would impact in a way that
is not already accounted for in the test
procedure as adopted in this final rule.
DOE considered the modifications in
the comments from NRCan and CocaCola regarding the name and definition
of standby mode as it applies to external
customer display signs, lights, or digital
screens. DOE agrees with NRCan’s
proposal to rename the definition of
standby mode to be more specific to the
accessories to which it is applied, and
is incorporating such a change in this
final rule. In response to Coca-Cola’s
suggested changes to the definition of
standby mode, DOE believes the
changes in fact alter the applicability
and intent of the definition. Coca-Cola’s
suggested changes appear to apply to
the beverage vending machine as a
whole, rather than just the external
customer display signs, lights, or digital
screens. Consistent with NRCan’s
suggestion, DOE’s standby mode
definition is applicable to external
customer display signs, lights, or digital
screens and, as such, DOE believes that
Coca-Cola’s proposed edits are not
applicable in this case.
Additionally, in light of consideration
of the stakeholder comments after
publication of the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE reviewed many
styles of external customer display
signs, lights, and digital screens and
determined that the previouslyproposed clarifications for Appendices
A and B are materially the same.
Specifically, both appendices clarify
that customer display signs, lighting,
and digital screens must be:
(1) Disabled, disconnected, or
otherwise de-energized, if possible and
if doing so does not interfere with the
primary functionality of the beverage
vending machine, or
(2) placed in its lowest energy
consuming state or standby mode (in
Appendix B) if the equipment cannot be
de-energized, or
(3) placed in the lowest energy
consuming state that maintains primary
functionality of the beverage vending
machine. As Table III.3 illustrates, the
only difference between the proposed
Appendices A and B methodologies is
the incorporation of ‘‘standby mode’’ as
the preferred operational state if the
equipment cannot be de-energized or
disconnected.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45780
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III.3—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED OPERATIONAL STATE FOR EXTERNAL DISPLAY SIGNS, LIGHTS, OR DIGITAL
SCREENS IN APPENDIX A AND APPENDIX B IN THE 2014 BVM TP NOPR
Operational state
External customer display sign, lights, or digital
screen characteristics
Appendix B
Can be de-energized and do not participate in
primary functionality of the beverage vending
machine.
Cannot be de-energized .....................................
Disabled, disconnected, or otherwise de-energized.
Disabled, disconnected, or otherwise de-energized.
Place in lowest energy consuming state .........
Necessary for primary functionality of beverage
vending machine.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Appendix A
Placed in lowest energy consuming state that
maintains primary functionality of the beverage vending machine.
Placed in ‘‘standby mode,’’ if available, or lowest energy consuming state.
Placed in lowest energy consuming state that
maintains primary functionality of the beverage vending machine.
This difference between the proposed
language for the two appendices would
only result in a material difference in
the test procedure if there is a difference
between ‘‘standby mode’’ and the
‘‘lowest energy consuming state’’ for
external customer display signs, lights,
or digital screens that cannot be deenergized. However, for external
customer display signs, lights, or digital
screens DOE reviewed, the ‘‘standby
mode’’ defined in Appendix B is the
same as the ‘‘lowest energy consuming
state’’ for equipment that cannot be deenergized and does not participate in
the vending function of the beverage
vending machine. Therefore, for the
sake of clarity and consistency, in this
final rule, DOE is aligning the treatment
of external customer display signs,
lights, and digital screens in
Appendices A and B. In these final rule
amendments, the definition of external
accessory standby mode and the
proposed treatment in Appendix B will
be applicable to both appendices.
Specifically, DOE is establishing
provisions in section 2.2.3.3 of
Appendix A and section 2.2.5.3 of
Appendix B to clarify that all external
display signs, lights, and digital screens
should be de-energized or, if they
cannot be de-energized without
impacting the primary functionality of
the equipment, placed in the external
accessory standby mode (if available) or
the lowest energy consuming state (if no
external accessory standby mode is
available) that maintains such
functionality. DOE also is establishing a
definition of external accessory standby
mode. DOE proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR to define ‘‘standby
mode’’ as the mode of operation in
which the external, integral customer
display signs, lighting, or digital screens
are connected to the main power; do not
produce the intended illumination,
display, or interaction functionality; and
can be switched into another mode
automatically with only a remote usergenerated or an internal signal. DOE is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
now incorporating this definition into
section 1.2 of both Appendices A and B
as the definition for ‘‘external accessory
standby mode.’’ As discussed
previously, DOE believes that keeping
the language consistent across the two
appendices will ensure continuity and
minimize unnecessary confusion.
d. Anti-Sweat and Other Electric
Resistance Heaters
Some beverage vending machines
may come equipped with anti-sweat
electric resistance heaters that serve to
evaporate any water that condenses on
the surface of the door or walls during
operation.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the test
procedure to clarify that anti-sweat and
other electric resistance heaters should
be operational during testing under the
DOE test procedure. DOE also proposed
to clarify that models with a userselectable setting must be turned on and
set to the maximum usage position, and
that models featuring an automatic, nonuser-adjustable controller that turns on
or off based on environmental
conditions must be operating in the
automatic state. Additionally, DOE
proposed to amend the regulatory text to
clarify that, if a unit is not shipped with
a controller from the point of
manufacture, but is intended to be used
with a controller, the manufacturer must
make representations of the basic model
based upon the rated performance of
that basic model as tested when
equipped with an appropriate
controller. 79 FR at 46921.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the amendments proposed
in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR
regarding anti-sweat and other electric
resistance heaters. Therefore, in this
final rule, DOE is incorporating the
clarifying provisions into section 2.2.3.4
of Appendix A and 2.2.5.4 of Appendix
B regarding the treatment of anti-sweat
and other electric resistance heaters as
proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
e. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps
Beverage vending machines capture
water from the air entering the cabinet
during operation by causing the water to
condense and then freeze on the
evaporator coil of the equipment.
During a defrost cycle, this frost is
melted, and the meltwater produced
must be removed from the unit. In many
types of equipment, this meltwater is
collected in a pan beneath the unit.
Some models of beverage vending
machines come equipped with electric
resistance heaters that evaporate this
water out of the pan and into the
ambient air. Other models may come
equipped with pumps that pump
meltwater to an external drain.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to add clarifying
language to the DOE test procedure in
Appendices A and B requiring that
these electric resistance heaters and
condensate pumps be installed and
operational during testing pursuant to
the DOE test procedure as they would
be used in the field during the entire
test. DOE proposed to clarify that prior
to the start of the24 hour period used to
determine temperature stabilization
prior to the start of the test period
(hereafter referred to as ‘‘stabilization
period’’), the condensate pan should be
dry and that, during the entirety of the
period of the test following the start of
the stabilization period, any condensate
moisture generated should be allowed to
accumulate in the pan as it would
during normal operation. DOE proposed
to require that, if the condensate heater
or pump was equipped with controls to
initiate the operation of the heater or
pump based on water level or ambient
conditions, these controls be enabled
and the heater or pump be operated in
the automatic setting, but that water
should not be manually added to or
removed from the condensate pan at any
time during the entire test. 79 FR at
46921–46922. Because manufacturers
may offer condensate pan heaters and
pumps that are shipped separately from
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
the specific beverage vending machine
unit with which they would be used in
normal operation, DOE also proposed to
clarify that any beverage vending
machines distributed in commerce with
an available condensate pan heater or
pump must be tested with the feature in
place. Id.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the amendment proposed in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR
regarding condensate pan heaters and
pumps. Therefore, in this final rule,
DOE is adopting the clarifications
proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR with no modifications
as sections 2.2.3.5 and 2.2.5.5 of
Appendix A and Appendix B,
respectively.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
f. Illuminated Temperature Displays
Manufacturers may equip some
beverage vending machine models with
illuminated displays that provide visual
information to the equipment operator
regarding, for example, the temperature
of the refrigerated volume of the unit.
DOE understands this feature to be
integral to the design of the given model
and, as such, in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, proposed to amend
the test procedure to clarify that any
illuminated temperature displays
should be enabled during testing as they
would be during normal field operation.
79 FR at 46922.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the amendment proposed in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR
regarding illuminated temperature
displays. Therefore, in this final rule,
DOE is adopting clarifying language in
section 2.2.3.6 of Appendix A and
section 2.2.5.6 of Appendix B to specify
that illuminated temperature displays
must be enabled during the test as they
would be during normal field operation,
consistent with what was proposed in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
g. Condenser Filters
Manufacturers may offer models
equipped with nonpermanent filters
over a model’s condenser coil to prevent
particulates from blocking the
condenser coil and reducing airflow. In
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed adding clarifying
language requiring that these filters be
removed during testing pursuant to the
DOE test procedure, as such accessories
are optional and are not required for
operation of the beverage vending
machine. 79 FR at 46922.
In response to DOE’s proposed
treatment of condenser filters in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, CMS
commented that if a beverage vending
machine is equipped with a condenser
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
filter, it should be tested with one
installed, as it can increase the energy
consumption of the unit. (CMS, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 100)
DOE did not receive any additional
comments on this topic.
DOE acknowledges CMS’s comment
regarding condenser filters, but while
condenser filters may impact long-term
energy consumption of beverage
vending machines in the field, these
optional condenser filters are not
expected to significantly impact energy
use over the relatively short duration of
the DOE test procedure. DOE further
notes that many options of condenser
filter styles or manufacturers may be
available, complicating and adding
burden to the DOE test procedure. As
condenser filters are more important for
the long-term reliability of the
equipment in the field than the tested
energy consumption, DOE does not
believe the additional burden associated
with requiring the testing and
certification of a number of different
BVM models based on small variations
in condenser filter manufacturers or
styles is justified. Therefore, in this final
rule, DOE is adopting the clarifying
language proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR and requiring that any
optional condenser filters be removed
during testing into sections 2.2.3.7 of
Appendix A and 2.2.5.7 of Appendix B.
h. Security Covers
Manufacturers may offer for sale, with
a basic model, optional straps or other
devices to secure the beverage vending
machine and prevent theft or tampering.
Because such security devices are not
anticipated to affect the measured
energy consumption of refrigerated
beverage vending machines and will
likely significantly complicate the
loading and testing of BVM models, in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to clarify that these
security devices should be removed
during testing under the DOE test
procedure. 79 FR at 46922.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the amendments proposed
in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR
regarding security covers. Therefore, in
this final rule, DOE is adopting the
proposed clarifying language in
Appendices A and B with no
modification into sections 2.2.3.8 and
2.2.5.8 of Appendix A and B,
respectively.
i. Coated Coils
Coated coils, generally specified for
use in units that will be subjected to
environments in which acids or
oxidizers are present, are treated with
an additional coating (such as a layer of
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45781
epoxy or polymer) as a barrier to protect
the bare metal of the coil from
deterioration and corrosion. DOE
believes the existing DOE test procedure
accurately accounts for the performance
of all types of coils, including those
with coatings, and that no additional
clarifications are needed in the test
procedure.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the discussion in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR regarding
coated coils. Therefore, in this final
rule, DOE is not adding any clarifying
language to the test procedure regarding
the treatment of coated coils.
j. General Purpose Outlets
Some beverage vending machines
may be offered for sale with integrated
general purpose electrical outlets, which
may be used to power additional
equipment. In the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE proposed adding
clarifying language to Appendices A
and BB specifying that no external load
should be connected to the general
purpose outlets contained on a unit
during testing. 79 FR at 46922.
DOE received one comment during
the NOPR public meeting regarding the
treatment of general purpose outlets on
beverage vending machines. NEEA
suggested fully energizing the electrical
outlet to the full amount that the circuit
is able to handle instead of deenergizing them to the lowest energy
consumption since they are regulated by
National Electric Code. (NEEA, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 96)
In response to the comment from NEEA,
DOE notes that energizing the general
purpose outlet to the maximum energy
consumption may give an estimation of
the maximum energy consumption of
the beverage vending machine, but fully
energizing the general purpose outlet is
not necessarily representative of the
energy consumption of any such
beverage vending machine in the field.
Due to the lack of information regarding
the extent to which general purpose
outlets on beverage vending machines
are used in the field and their
representative incremental energy
consumption on beverage vending
machines equipped with such devices,
DOE is unable to determine a
representative test procedure or load
profile for general purpose outlets.
Therefore, DOE is clarifying in sections
2.2.3.9 of Appendix A and 2.2.5.9 of
Appendix B that no external load
should be connected to the general
purpose outlets contained on a unit in
this final rule, as proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45782
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
k. Crankcase Heaters and Electric
Resistance Heaters for Cold Weather
Some BVM models feature crankcase
heaters or electric resistance heaters
designed to keep the compressor warm
in order to maintain the refrigerant at
optimal conditions or to prevent
freezing of beverages contained in the
unit when the unit is operating at
extremely low ambient temperatures. In
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to clarify that, if present,
crankcase heaters and other electric
resistance heaters for cold weather
should be operational during the test.
DOE also proposed that, if a control
system, such as a thermostat or
electronic controller, is used to
modulate the operation of the heater, it
should be used as intended per the
manufacturer’s instructions. 79 FR at
46922.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the proposed clarification
that crankcase heaters and electric
resistance heaters for cold weather, if
present, should be operational during
the test and, if controlled, should be
controlled in accordance with the
manufacturer’s instructions. Therefore,
in this final rule, DOE is adopting the
clarifying provisions as sections 2.2.3.10
and 2.2.5.10 of Appendix A and B,
respectively, as proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Appendix B: Summary of the Test
Procedure Revisions to Account for Low
Power Modes
In this final rule, DOE is also updating
the DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines, to include in a new
Appendix B to 10 CFR part 431, subpart
Q, which is to be used to demonstrate
compliance with any new or amended
standards established as a result of the
associated ongoing energy conservation
standards rulemaking. (Docket No.
EERE–2013–BT–STD–0022) This new
Appendix B includes all of the
amendments in Appendix A and, in
addition, provisions for testing low
power modes.
Many beverage vending machines are
equipped with low power modes
designed to be used during periods
when demand for refrigerated beverages
is low and there is opportunity to
reduce equipment energy use without
greatly affecting consumer utility. The
features of these modes may include
(but are not limited to) dimming or
switching off lights, and raising the
temperature set point (to which the unit
cools the product) to a value higher than
the temperature set point associated
with the unit’s vending mode.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
BVM low power modes are typically
activated during periods when customer
traffic is known or anticipated to be
minimal or nonexistent (such as at night
or when a facility is closed), though
they may also be activated based on
short-term historical vend patterns or
after a specified length of inactivity.
Some low power modes may operate on
fixed schedules, while others may
operate based on sensor input such as
that from a motion sensor or customer
interface on the machine. Individual
machines may have multiple low power
modes, such as a schedule-based low
power mode allowing the refrigeration
system to shut off during periods when
customers are not available and an
activity-based low power mode during
vending periods that dims the lights
when customer activity is not detected
after a certain length of time.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004,
the test method incorporated by
reference in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule, and ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2010, the test
method DOE is incorporating by
reference in this final rule, both require
that the vending machine be ‘‘operated
with normal lighting and control
settings, using only those energy
management controls that are
permanently operational and not
capable of being adjusted by a machine
operator.’’ (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1–2004 7.1.1(d)) These test methods
do not capture the widely available
user-adjustable low power modes of
operation in a representative manner,
and manufacturers that offer this
functionality are not able to reflect the
increased efficiency of their units under
either of these test methods.
Additionally, these test methods do not
specify how to test equipment that has
permanently operational controls
(meaning those that cannot be
disabled).)
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed amendments to
the BVM test procedure to provide clear
and consistent provisions for testing
beverage vending machines equipped
with low power modes as well as to
indicate what settings would be
required to be used for the testing of
machines with energy management
controls that are permanently
operational (meaning those that cannot
be disabled), but can be adjusted by the
operator. 79 FR 46908, 46923–46927
(Aug. 11, 2014). DOE received
comments on those proposals in the
2014 NOPR public meeting and during
the written comment period following
publication of the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR in the Federal
Register. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
This section summarizes DOE’s
specific proposals regarding the
treatment of low power modes in the
BVM test procedure, any comments
received regarding those proposals,
DOE’s response to comments received,
and the revisions to the test procedure
related to low power modes that are
included in sections 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.3.1,
and 2.3.2 of Appendix B. Specifically,
sections III.B.1, III.B.2, and III.B.3
discuss definitions related to the low
power mode test procedure, DOE’s
adopted test method for accounting for
low power modes of operation, and the
refrigeration low power mode
verification test, respectively.
1. Definitions Related to the Low Power
Mode Test Procedure
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to allow
manufacturers of equipment with a low
power mode to enable features
associated with that mode during a
fixed period of time during the BVM test
procedure. DOE defined ‘‘low power
mode’’ as a state in which a BVM’s
lighting, refrigeration, and/or other
energy-using systems are automatically
adjusted (without user intervention)
such that they consume less energy than
they consume in an active vending
environment when the beverage
vending machine is capable of
dispensing sealed beverages at the
intended vending temperature (typically
36 °F ± 1 °F). 79 FR at 46924.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE also noted that it might be
beneficial to differentiate between low
power modes that affect the refrigeration
system and allow the cabinet
temperature to increase during a
specified period and those that affect
other energy-consuming accessories,
such as lighting, display signage, or
vending equipment. As such, DOE
proposed to separately define
‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’ and
‘‘accessory low power mode.’’ DOE
proposed to define refrigeration system
low power mode as a state in which a
beverage vending machine’s
refrigeration system is in low power
mode and the average next-to-vend
temperature is automatically (without
user intervention) increased to 40 °F or
higher for at least 1 hour. DOE proposed
to define ‘‘accessory low power mode’’
as a state in which a beverage vending
machine’s lighting and/or other nonrefrigeration energy using systems are in
low power mode, which may include,
but is not limited to, dimming or
turning off lights or display signage, but
which does not include adjustment of
the refrigeration system. Id.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
NEEA and SVA supported DOE’s
proposed definition of low power mode.
(NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
0004 at pp. 147–148; SVA, No. 0008 at
p. 3) Regarding DOE’s proposed
definition of ‘‘refrigeration low power
mode,’’ SVA noted that refrigeration low
power modes can vary, and therefore
need to be broadly included in DOE’s
definition, specifically objecting to the
clause ‘‘without user intervention,’’ if
such was intended to include the initial
programming of software parameters
that allow the refrigeration low power
mode to be enabled. SVA offered that
various methods can be used to achieve
the same outcome of reduced energy
consumption resulting from variations
in refrigeration system operation (SVA,
No. 0008 at p. 3) Coca-Cola commented
that the refrigeration low power mode
should not be micromanaged and that
refrigeration low power modes could
include cycling the evaporator fan or
temporarily defeating the defrost cycles.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 9)
In response to DOE’s request for
comment on the proposed definition of
‘‘standby,’’ (see section III.A.11.c), CocaCola commented that DOE should
consider an alternative definition that
DOE believes is applicable to DOE’s
proposed definition of low power mode.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
Specifically, Coca-Cola suggested the
following definition for standby mode
for beverage vending machines:
‘‘Standby mode is the state that the
vending machine is in when it does not
have to deliver product, is not intended
to deliver product, or cannot be used to
select and purchase a product. In this
mode of operation any powered element
can be in a different state than when the
machine is in normal operation
delivering product to a consumer.
Standby mode can be activated
automatically by programming or by
sensory devices monitoring internal
functions or external conditions and
activity.’’ (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
While DOE’s standby mode definition is
only applicable to external customer
display signs, lights, and digital screens,
DOE believes Coca-Cola’s comments are
also pertinent to how DOE defines low
power mode for beverage vending
machines. As such, DOE also
considered these comments with respect
to the ‘‘low power mode’’ definition
proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR.
DOE appreciates the interested
parties’ support regarding the inclusion
of definitions of ‘‘low power mode,’’
‘‘accessory low power mode,’’ and
‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’ in the
test procedure. In response to Coca-Cola
and SVA’s comments regarding the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
definition of ‘‘refrigeration low power
mode,’’ DOE acknowledges that
theoretically, there are many
mechanisms and control approaches to
adjusting the refrigeration system to
achieve energy savings during extended
periods of inactivity. However, DOE
must balance the desire for flexibility in
the ‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’
definition with the need to have any
such ‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’ be
verifiable. As such, DOE has designed
the ‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’
definition to, as much as possible, be
focused on what a ‘‘refrigeration low
power mode’’ is intended to achieve,
namely, energy savings resulting from
the elevation of the refrigerated cabinet
temperature when the beverage vending
machine is not in an active vending
environment. Therefore, the
‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’
definition is intended to be broadly
applicable to any type of control that
achieves the desired effect. However,
DOE must be able to quantifiably
confirm the presence of any
refrigeration low power mode to prevent
manufacturers from being able to claim
the energy savings associated with the
existence of a refrigeration low power
mode when the beverage vending
machine does not, in fact, include such
a feature. Thus, DOE defined the
refrigeration low power mode to
reference a quantifiable temperature
threshold and time interval, to ensure
that the existence of a refrigeration low
power mode could be quantifiably
determined through a test. See section
III.B.3 for a more in-depth discussion of
DOE’s specific refrigeration low power
mode verification test method. As
mentioned above, DOE acknowledges
that there may be some types of
refrigeration low power mode controls
that are not effectively captured by
DOE’s proposed refrigeration low power
mode verification test and, in such a
case, the manufacturer of such
equipment should submit a petition for
a test procedure waiver in accordance
with the provisions in 10 CFR
431.401.12
In response to Coca-Cola’s comment
regarding cycling the evaporator fan or
temporarily defeating the defrost cycles
as a type of refrigeration low power
mode, DOE notes that such controls are
only low power modes to the extent that
they are activated when the beverage
vending machine is not intended to be
actively vending, which is consistent
12 DOE issued a final rule amending its
regulations governing petitions for waiver and
interim waiver from DOE test procedures for
consumer products and commercial and industrial
equipment. 79 FR 26591 (May 9, 2014). This final
rule became effective on June 9, 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45783
with DOE’s definition of low power
mode. If a beverage vending machine
contains controls on the evaporator fan
or other systems that do not meet the
definition of low power mode and are
not adjustable by the machine operator,
such controls can be employed for the
duration of the test procedure, provided
their operation maintains the primary
functionality of the beverage vending
machine and is not inconsistent with
the specifications of section III.A.11. If
such controls do meet the definition of
a low power mode, they would be
treated as an accessory low power
mode, and could be enabled and tested
during the low power mode period.
Although evaporator and condenser fan
motor controls and defrost controls do
affect the refrigeration system, they are
not treated as refrigeration system low
power modes unless they adjust cabinet
temperature. To clarify this, DOE is
modifying the definition of refrigeration
low power mode to more specifically
explain that a refrigeration low power
mode is any state in which a beverage
vending machine’s refrigeration system
is in low power mode by raising the
cabinet temperature. Additionally, DOE
is modifying the definition of accessory
low power mode to clarify that any
control system that meets the definition
of a low power mode and is not a
refrigeration low power mode qualifies
as an accessory low power mode.
In response to Coca-Cola’s comments
regarding the definition of ‘‘standby
mode,’’ which DOE determined were
potentially also applicable to DOE’s
definition of ‘‘low power mode,’’ DOE
believes that Coca-Cola’s suggestions are
consistent with DOE’s definition of
‘‘low power mode’’ for beverage vending
machines. Specifically, DOE believes
that Coca-Cola’s suggested language—
‘‘any powered element can be in a
different state than when the machine is
in normal operation delivering product
to a consumer’’—is consistent with
DOE’s definition, which specifies that,
in low power mode, a beverage vending
machine’s lighting, refrigeration, and/or
other energy-using systems are
automatically adjusted (without user
intervention) such that they consume
less energy than they consume in an
active vending environment. CocaCola’s more specific language regarding
how such modes may be activated
provides useful examples of control
methods, all of which are recognized
under DOE’s ‘‘low power mode’’
definition. However, DOE believes that
the proposed definition is more flexible
and more broadly applicable, since it
does not prescribe specific control
methods or specific features that must
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45784
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
be disabled. As Coca-Cola’s suggestions
are not substantively different than
DOE’s proposed definition for ‘‘low
power mode,’’ DOE is adopting the
proposed definition without
modification.
DOE also notes that ‘‘low power
mode’’ as defined in this final rule is
different from EPCA’s definition of
‘‘standby mode.’’ Regarding the
applicability of ‘‘standby mode’’ to
beverage vending machines in general,
DOE reviewed the operating modes
available for beverage vending machines
and determined that this equipment
does not have operating modes that
meet the definition of standby mode or
off mode, as established at 42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(3). Specifically, beverage
vending machines are typically
providing at least one main function—
refrigeration. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A))
DOE recognizes that in a unique
equipment design, the low power mode
includes disabling the refrigeration
system, while for other equipment the
low power mode controls only elevate
the thermostat set point. Because low
power modes still include some amount
of refrigeration for the vast majority of
equipment, DOE believes that such a
mode does not constitute a ‘‘standby
mode,’’ as defined by EPCA, for
beverage vending machines.
2. Low Power Mode Test Method
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to establish a
physical test that consists of a 6-hour
low power mode test period that allows
accessory low power modes to be
enabled, and a separate calculation
approach to account for refrigeration
low power modes. DOE proposed a
calculation-based approach to account
for refrigeration low power modes
because DOE believed it was the best
method to provide consistent and
equitable treatment among BMV
models, and to ensure the accuracy and
repeatability of the test method, without
making the test method unduly
burdensome to conduct. 79 FR at
46924–46926.
Under DOE’s proposed method,
equipment with a low power mode
would stabilize and operate under
normal test procedure conditions, with
all equipment and accessories energized
as they would be when the equipment
is capable of actively refrigerating and
vending sealed beverages (as specified
in section III.A.11), for the first 18 hours
of the test period. During this ‘‘active
vending’’ test period, DOE proposed
that any low power modes be disabled
and, unless specified otherwise by
another portion of the test procedure,
that all low power mode control features
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
that cannot be disabled but can be
adjusted would be required to be
adjusted such that the DEC is
maximized, to best represent the likely
performance of the equipment in the
field while in active vending mode.
Similarly, DOE proposed adopting a
modification to ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1, requiring that any party
performing the test procedure provide,
if necessary, any physical stimuli or
other input to the machine that may be
needed to prevent automatic activation
of low power modes during the vending
state test period. Id.
Then, for equipment with an
accessory low power mode, DOE
proposed that the accessory low power
mode may be enabled for the final 6
hours of the test, or from hour 18 to
hour 24 of the 24-hour test. 79 FR at
46926. For equipment with multiple
accessory low power modes or multiple
energy use states, DOE clarified that
equipment should be configured with
the lowest energy-consuming lighting
and control settings during the
accessory low power mode test period.
79 FR at 46927. Equipment without an
accessory low power mode would
continue to operate normally and in
accordance with specifications in the
DOE test procedure. DOE proposed 6
-hours as a representative length of time
for the low power mode test period,
based on the fact that it is intended to
represent off hours between periods of
vending when the facility may be closed
or have low occupancy. While DOE
recognizes that there is a wide range of
types of low power mode controls and
time periods for which these controls
are enabled, DOE believes a timeframe
of 6 hours is a reasonable representation
of average field use. 79 FR at 46926.
To account for the energy savings
associated with the presence of any
refrigeration low power modes, DOE
proposed using a calculation-based
energy credit equal to 3 percent of the
measured DEC of any unit equipped
with a refrigeration low power mode. Id.
DOE developed the 3 percent value
based upon test data evaluating the low
power mode energy savings for a variety
of different BVM models available on
the market. DOE developed the credit to
represent the approximate energy
savings that would have been achieved
through a 6-hour time period during
which the refrigeration low power mode
of the tested unit was enabled,
including any time and energy
consumption necessary to return the
case to appropriate vending temperature
within the 6-hour period. The method
DOE used to develop this value is
described in detail in the BVM test
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
procedure NOPR. 79 FR at 46925–
46926.
In response to DOE’s proposed low
power mode test provisions, DOE
received a number of comments from
interested parties. AMS supported
DOE’s proposed low power mode test
method, but noted that characteristics of
the low power mode were account
driven and depended on what
customers wanted. (AMS, No. 0007 at
pp. 7–8) Coca-Cola agreed with AMS
that the low power mode is dependent
on many factors and is primarily
account-driven and they noted that a
test-procedure should not define or
limit how energy savings are achieved.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 9) ASHRAE
SPC 32.1 and SVA supported DOE’s
view regarding the responsibility of the
testing entity to provide the necessary
stimuli to prevent automatic activation
of low power modes during the vending
state test procedure. (ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4; SVA, No. 0008
at p. 3) However, SVA stated that the
inclusion of low power modes in the
test procedure would be overly
burdensome to manufacturers and
would make it difficult to compare
results. SVA added that these features
are present on most, if not all, beverage
vending machines and SVA did not
support giving manufacturers an option
to reduce the publicized DEC value
without actually changing anything of
substance. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3)
Regarding DOE’s proposed
calculation-based method to account for
refrigeration low power modes, NEEA
and SVA supported DOE’s proposal to
provide a percentage credit to machines
with a refrigeration low power mode.
(NEEA, No. 0009 at p.2; SVA, No. 0008
at p. 3) Conversely, ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
Coca-Cola, California IOUs, and AMS
commented that a physical test would
be the most accurate method to account
for low power mode operation and
expressed concern about the 3 percent
savings credit for refrigeration data low
power mode. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No.
0011 at p. 4; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.
10; CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 2; AMS, No.
0007 at pp. 7–8) ASHRAE SPC 32.1
stated that the committee is currently
working to specify a physical
refrigeration low power mode test
protocol that would be applicable to all
BVM operating schemes. (ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4) Coca-Cola
submitted that it was acceptable to
separate low power mode for
refrigeration systems from low power
mode for other machine functions, since
the former is tied to food safety. (CocaCola, No. 0010 at p. 9)
Regarding the length of the low power
mode test period, Coca-Cola supported
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
DOE’s proposal of a 6-hour low power
mode test period. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010
at p. 9) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 noted that
the committee was considering
alternative time periods for the low
power mode test period, and was in the
process of researching available field
data to determine what would be most
appropriate and representative.
(ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4)
DOE appreciates comments from
interested parties expressing support for
DOE’s low power mode test method.
DOE agrees with interested parties that
there are a wide variety of low power
mode controls and approaches. DOE has
attempted to define ‘‘low power mode,’’
‘‘accessory low power mode,’’
‘‘refrigeration low power mode,’’ and
the associated test methods to be
technology-neutral, to the extent
possible. Specifically, DOE designed the
definitions of ‘‘low power mode,’’
‘‘accessory low power mode,’’ and
‘‘refrigeration low power mode’’ to focus
on the intended outcome of the low
power mode, namely energy savings
during periods of inactivity, rather than
the specific mechanism by which such
energy savings are accomplished, as
discussed in section III.B.1. DOE also
notes that employing a physical
accessory low power mode test allows
any control that meets DOE’s definition
of accessory low power mode to be
enabled during the 6-hour low power
mode test period, and the energy
savings from any such accessory low
power mode to be objectively
determined. Because DOE did not
employ a physical test, when defining
‘‘refrigeration low power mode,’’ DOE
had to be more cognizant of the specific
characteristics that constituted a
refrigeration low power mode to ensure
that the 3 percent credit would be
applicable and to ensure that the
presence of a low power mode was
verifiable, as discussed further in
section III.B.3.
In response to SVA’s comment
regarding the additional burden
associated with accounting for the
impact of low power modes in the DOE
test procedure, DOE believes that
including a method to quantify the
energy impact of low power modes is
important to ensure that the test is
representative of the energy
consumption of the equipment, since, as
SVA notes, low power modes are a
common feature on many beverage
vending machines. In addition, DOE
considered repeatability and the burden
of testing when developing the low
power mode test method, and believes
the proposed test method represents
very little additional burden while
providing a fair and accurate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
comparison of BVM performance.
Specifically, DOE is adopting a
calculation-based approach to account
for the impact of any refrigeration low
power mode because it is the least
burdensome and most repeatable
approach.
However, as noted in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR, non-refrigeration
based accessory low power modes are
more straightforward to evaluate based
on a physical test. Therefore, as a
physical test will more accurately
capture the energy impact of any
accessory low power modes, DOE
believes that a physical test is warranted
in this case. Physical testing of
accessory low power modes will also
allow for differentiation and
performance comparisons among
different BVM models equipped with
different accessory low power modes,
whereas a calculation-based approach
may not. DOE notes that the accessory
low power mode test will not add to the
length of the test, and only requires the
interaction of test personnel to program
the low power mode controls, which
DOE believes will not significantly
impact the burden associated with
conducting the DOE test procedure.
DOE specifically quantifies the burden
associated with the low power mode
test provisions, as well as all the test
procedure amendments adopted in this
final rule, in section IV.B.
Regarding the repeatability of the
accessory low power mode test method,
DOE acknowledges comments from
interested parties that accessory low
power modes may employ a variety of
different control strategies and control a
variety of different components. While
DOE believes that it is important to
preserve flexibility to accommodate
various types of accessory low power
mode controls in the DOE test
procedure, DOE understands that this
could impact the repeatability of the test
if it is not clear which control settings
should be employed for testing.
Therefore, as proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR, DOE is adopting
provisions in this final rule that
beverage vending machines with
multiple accessory low power modes
must be placed in the accessory low
power mode that results in the
maximum energy savings.
DOE appreciates the comments from
ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Coca-Cola,
California IOUs, and AMS regarding a
desire for a physical test for the
refrigeration low power mode. DOE
agrees with commenters that a physical
test would be more accurate for a
specific tested BVM unit and would
allow for better differentiation of the
performance of different types of
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45785
refrigeration low power mode controls.
However, as noted in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE understands that
refrigeration low power modes are
extremely variable in terms of their
control strategies and operation and, in
addition, may require specific
instructions from the manufacturer to
precisely modify or adjust the control
systems to accommodate the specific
provisions of the DOE test procedure. 79
FR at 46924–46925. DOE believes that
this would reduce the consistency and
repeatability of such a physical test
method and would make the method
impractical to implement. Therefore,
due to the difficulty of accounting for
the wide variety of refrigeration low
power modes in a consistent, fair, and
reasonable manner, DOE is electing to
adopt a calculation-based refrigeration
low power mode credit, as proposed in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
The refrigeration low power mode credit
was calculated based on the physical
testing of several BVM units, with and
without the refrigeration low power
mode employed, and including the
energy consumption of the refrigeration
system and all lights and accessories
available on the tested units. Based on
these test data, DOE determined the
average reduction in measured DEC
resulting from use of the refrigeration
low power mode only. DOE notes that,
with regard to the calculation-based
provisions for determining the DEC
when testing is conducted without a
payment mechanism, the refrigeration
low power mode credit would be
applied to the calculated DEC,
determined as the sum of the tested
primary energy consumption and the
default payment mechanism energy
consumption value. Whether using the
testing-based or calculation-based
provisions for determining the DEC
(with or without a payment mechanism
installed, respectively), the refrigeration
low power mode credit is applied to the
total energy consumption of the
machine, including all accessories and
refrigeration system components.
DOE also appreciates the comments of
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 regarding their work
on developing a physical testing-based
refrigeration low power mode test
method that would be universally
applicable to all systems. However, DOE
notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 did not
provide any additional information
regarding the specific test provisions
they are considering. DOE also notes
that DOE has been following the work
of ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and is not aware
of any discussions proposing or
finalizing a refrigeration low power
mode test method at this time. While
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45786
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
the work of ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is
ongoing, to DOE’s knowledge, a
repeatable and consistent physical
refrigeration low power mode test is not
available at this time and, as such, DOE
is adopting the refrigeration low power
mode credit proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR.
With regard to the comments from
interested parties regarding the 3percent credit for beverage vending
machines with refrigeration low power
mode capability, DOE acknowledges the
concerns of some commenters that 3
percent may not accurately describe the
specific energy savings from a unique
instance of a refrigeration low power
mode. However, DOE’s estimate of 3
percent energy savings due to the
operation of low power modes is based
on the data available and known to
DOE, and DOE notes that interested
parties did not submit additional data to
inform this estimate. DOE understands
that the control strategies employed by
various refrigeration low power modes
could result in variation in the achieved
energy savings, even assuming they are
evaluated according to a consistent test
method. However, DOE reiterates that
the proposed 3-percent credit is
determined based on low power mode
test results of BVM models with
different low power modes 13 and, as
such, DOE believes 3-percent is
representative of the common types of
refrigeration low power modes DOE has
observed in the market place. Therefore,
DOE is maintaining the 3-percent energy
savings credit proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR for beverage
vending machines with a refrigeration
low power mode.
With regard to the length of the low
power mode test period, DOE
appreciates Coca-Cola’s support of the
6-hour low power mode test duration.
DOE also appreciates ASHRAE SPC
32.1’s comment that they were
considering alternative time periods for
the low power mode test period and
were in the process of researching
available field data to determine what
would be most appropriate and
representative. However, DOE notes that
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 did not submit any
additional data regarding BVM low
power mode usage profiles or durations.
Lacking any additional data or more
specific recommendations, DOE is
maintaining the low power mode test
duration at 6 hours as proposed in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
13 DOE described the method for determining the
3 percent credit in detail in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR. 79 FR 46908, 46925–46926 (Aug.
11, 2014).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
DOE believes the accessory and
refrigeration low power mode test
provisions are applicable to most forms
of low power modes available in the
marketplace. However, DOE is aware of
some forms of ‘‘learning-based’’ energy
management controls that cannot be
accurately or consistently captured by
the DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines. Such energy
management controls save energy by,
over time, using historic sales and traffic
data and embedded algorithms to profile
and predict typical times of high and
low traffic and sales based on the sales
history of the machine. However, it is
extremely difficult to develop a
repeatable procedure to evaluate the
energy savings from such controls over
a 24-hour test in a testing laboratory. As
such, DOE acknowledges that such
energy management controls would not
be effectively captured over the course
of the DOE test procedure and, as such,
should be disabled during the test, if
possible. If such ‘‘learning-based’’
controls also have a ‘‘schedule-based’’
or programmable mode, the energy
management controls can be operated in
the programmed mode in accordance
with the accessory low power mode
provisions. If the controls do not have
a programmable mode and cannot be
disabled during the test, or the energy
management control provisions are
otherwise inapplicable, the
manufacturer of that equipment should
submit a petition for request a waiver in
accordance with the provisions in 10
CFR 431.401.14
3. Refrigeration Low Power Mode
Verification Test Protocol
DOE recognizes that a calculated
energy credit will not account for
differences in performance or efficacy
among different types of refrigeration
low power modes and will not
objectively verify the performance or
existence of a refrigerated low power
mode. Therefore, a procedure to verify
the existence of a refrigeration low
power mode, as defined, is required to
ensure BVM manufacturers do not apply
the 3-percent refrigeration low power
mode credit to basic models that have
a refrigeration low power mode that will
not result in energy savings in the field.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed a refrigeration
low power mode verification test
method, which included initiating the
refrigeration low power mode after
14 DOE issued a final rule amending its
regulations governing petitions for waiver and
interim waiver from DOE test procedures for
consumer products and commercial and industrial
equipment. 79 FR 26591 (May 9, 2014). This final
rule became effective on June 9, 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
completion of the 24-hour BVM test
period and recording the average
temperature of the standard test
packages in the next-to-vend beverage
positions for the next 2 hours. Under
DOE’s proposal, over the course of this
2-hour period, the instantaneous
average next-to-vend beverage
temperatures (i.e., the spatial average of
all next-to-vend beverages) would be
required to increase above 40 °F and
remain above 40 °F for at least 1 hour.
DOE also proposed that the beverage
vending machine would be required to
be capable of automatically returning
itself to its normal operating conditions,
including the specified integrated
average temperature, at the conclusion
of the refrigeration low power mode. To
limit unnecessary burden, DOE also
proposed that this validation test would
not be required to determine the DEC of
BVM models, but would be employed
by DOE for enforcement purposes to
verify the existence of a refrigeration
low power mode.
In response to DOE’s proposed
refrigeration low power mode, SVA
commented that 1 hour might not be a
sufficient time span to raise the
temperature of all the next-to-vend
packages above 40 °F. SVA reasoned
that this depended on multiple factors,
including insulation effectiveness.
(SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Coca-Cola drew
DOE’s attention to the FDA Food Code,
which recommends that in a refrigerated
vending machine, the air temperature
may not exceed 5 °C for more than 30
minutes immediately after the machine
is filled, serviced, or re-stocked. Because
of this, Coca-Cola suggested that it
would be impractical to have a test
where a product is maintained over
40 °F for 1 hour, and that should such
a test be conducted, it should be for
information only. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010
at p. 10)
DOE appreciates the comments
submitted by SVA that the duration of
the refrigeration low power mode
verification test may not be long enough
to reach 40 °F and agrees that the time
it takes the refrigerated cabinet to reach
such a temperature will be dependent
on a number of things, including the
insulation effectiveness. DOE based is
original proposed duration of 2 hours on
available test data from a range of BVM
models employing low power mode.
Based on the BVM models for which
DOE had data, all BVM units had
reached a temperature of at least 40 °F
within 2 hours. However, DOE does not
wish to disincentivize BVM
manufacturers from increasing the
energy efficiency of equipment by
increasing the insulation level on the
refrigerated compartment, if doing so
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
would prevent the case from being able
to meet the refrigeration low power
mode verification test. Therefore, DOE
is changing the refrigeration low power
mode verification test duration to 6
hours. That is, in this final rule, DOE is
adopting the following provisions for
the refrigeration low power mode test.
In order for a manufacturer to apply the
refrigeration low power mode credit to
a particular BVM unit, the BVM unit
must either:
A. Satisfy the following three
requirements:
(1) The instantaneous average next-tovend beverage temperature must reach
at least 4 °F above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application
product temperature, as applicable,
within 6 hours;
(2) The instantaneous average next-tovend beverage temperature must be
maintained at least 4 °F above the
integrated average temperature or lowest
application product temperature, as
applicable, for at least 1 hour; and
(3) After the instantaneous average
next-to-vend beverage temperature is
maintained at or above 4 °F above the
integrated average temperature or lowest
application product temperature, as
applicable, for at least 1 hour, the
refrigerated beverage vending machine
must return to the specified integrated
average temperature or lowest
application product temperature, as
applicable, automatically without direct
physical intervention; or
B. Not activate the compressor for the
entire 6 hour period, in which case the
instantaneous average beverage
temperature does not have to reach 4 °F
above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application
product temperature, as applicable, but,
the equipment must still automatically
return to the integrated average
temperature or lowest application
product temperature, as applicable, after
the 6 hour period without direct
physical intervention.
DOE notes that the temperature
threshold of at least 4 °F above the
integrated average temperature, or 40 °F
for most equipment, was selected based
on the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s ENERGY STAR® 15 Product
Specification for Refrigeration Beverage
Vending Machines, Version 3.1,16
15 ENERGY STAR is a joint program of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and DOE that
establishes a voluntary rating, certification, and
labeling program for highly energy efficient
consumer products and commercial equipment.
Information on the program is available at
www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=home.index.
16 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for
Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
which requires that qualified beverage
vending machines include either a
lighting low power state, refrigeration
low power state, or whole machine low
power state. ENERGY STAR further
defines refrigeration low power state as
a state in which the average beverage
temperature is allowed to rise to 40 °F
or higher for an extended period of time.
Given its use in other industry
standards, DOE believes it is consistent
to reference a similar temperature
threshold when defining refrigeration
low power mode in the DOE test
procedure.
In response to Coca-Cola’s comment
regarding refrigerated beverage vending
machines designed to vend perishable
products, DOE notes that if a beverage
vending machine is not equipped with
a refrigeration low power mode because
it is designed to vend perishable
products, then it will not be eligible for
the refrigeration low power mode credit.
As such, this optional test procedure to
verify the existence of a refrigeration
low power mode would not be
applicable to such refrigerated beverage
vending machines. The provisions for
testing refrigerated beverage vending
machines equipped with a refrigeration
low power mode do not require BVM
models to be sold with such a feature or
preclude BVM models from being sold
without a refrigeration low power mode.
Additionally, DOE wishes to mention
that, as previously discussed in the
context of operating temperatures,
manufacturers should test and rate their
basic models for the purposes of
certification using only those controls
with which units of the given basic
model is are distributed in commerce
and intended to be used in the field.
Moreover, the use of any control
schemes designed solely for the
purposes of conducting the DOE test
that are not available on the beverage
vending machine as it is distributed in
commerce cannot be used during the
test. If a manufacturer produces a design
which it believes should be qualified for
the refrigeration low power mode credit
but which cannot meet the verification
requirements as outlined above, the
manufacturer should apply submit a
petition for a test procedure waiver for
that basic model in accordance with the
provisions in 10 CFR 431.401, as noted
above in section III.B.2.
Eligibility Criteria: Version 3.1. Revised December
2013. https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/
files/specs//private/Vending%20
Machines%20Program%20Requirements
%20Version%203%201.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45787
C. Other Amendments and
Clarifications
DOE is also amending 10 CFR
429.52(b) to clarify the reporting
requirements at 10 CFR 429.52(b).
Similarly, DOE is amending the
introductory language found in 10 CFR
431.296 to clarify the applicability of
the DEC measured in accordance with
the test procedure to the energy
conservation standards listed in that
section.
In this section, DOE discusses DOE’s
proposed amendments regarding the
certification and reporting requirements
for beverage vending machines,
comments DOE received on these
issues, DOE’s response to any comments
received, and the final amendments
being adopted as part of this final rule.
In section III.C.1, DOE also discusses
comments received that are not related
to any of the specific test procedure
amendments.
1. Clarifications to the Scope of the
BVM Regulations
In written comments received in
response to the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, AMS stated that
vending machines that do not dispense
beverages should be completely
excluded from the scope of this
rulemaking. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 4)
In response to AMS’s comment, DOE
notes that all equipment meeting the
definition of refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine
established by EPCA are subject to
DOE’s regulations, including the DOE
test procedure and applicable energy
conservation standards. Refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending
machine is defined as ‘‘a commercial
refrigerator that cools bottled or canned
beverages and dispenses the bottled or
canned beverages on payment.’’ 10 CFR
431.292 To explicitly include any
beverage vending machines that may
vend cooled beverages that are in
unusual containers, DOE also defines
‘‘bottled or canned beverage’’ as ‘‘a
beverage in a sealed container.’’
Therefore, as noted by AMS, vending
machines that do not cool or dispense
beverages in sealed containers do not
meet the definition of a refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending
machine and, as such, are not subject to
DOE’s regulations for refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending
machines.
2. Clarifications to Certification and
Reporting Requirements
DOE notes that 10 CFR 429.52(b)(2)
contains requirements for certification
reports for covered beverage vending
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45788
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
machines. Specifically, DOE requires
reporting of ‘‘maximum average daily
energy consumption.’’ However, the
outcome of the DOE test procedure is
the measured ‘‘daily energy
consumption’’ for a given model of
beverage vending machine. To be
consistent, DOE proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR to update the
reporting requirements at 10 CFR
429.52(b)(2) to require certification
reports to include ‘‘daily energy
consumption’’ rather than ‘‘maximum
average daily energy consumption.’’ 79
FR at 46927.
The ‘‘daily energy consumption’’ of a
given BVM basic model measured using
the DOE test procedure and reported in
accordance with 10 CFR 429.52(b)(2)
should be compared to the ‘‘maximum
daily energy consumption’’ for the basic
model’s respective equipment class in
the standard table in 10 CFR 431.296 to
determine whether the basic model
complies with the relevant standard. To
clarify the relationship between these
terms, DOE also proposed to update the
language at 10 CFR 431.296 to specify
that the ‘‘daily energy consumption’’
(rather than the ‘‘maximum daily energy
consumption’’) of each basic model of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine must not exceed the
‘‘maximum daily energy consumption’’
specified in the energy conservation
standard table. Id.
DOE did not receive any comments on
the proposed amendments to 10 CFR
429.52(b) with regards to reporting
requirements for beverage vending
machines, or the introductory language
found in 10 CFR 431.296 to clarify the
applicability of the DEC measured in
accordance with the test procedure to
the energy conservation standards listed
in that section. Therefore, DOE is
adopting the proposed clarifications
discussed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR with no modifications.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute
‘‘significant regulatory actions’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR
51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this
action was not subject to review under
the Executive Order by the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the OMB.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
B. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation
of an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IFRA) for any rule that by law
must be proposed for public comment,
unless the agency certifies that the rule,
if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. As
required by Executive Order 13272,
‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities
in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461
(Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published
procedures and policies on February 19,
2003, to ensure that the potential
impacts of its rules on small entities are
properly considered during the DOE
rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE
has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General
Counsel’s Web site: https://energy.gov/
gc/office-general-counsel.
DOE reviewed the proposed rule,
which would amend the test procedure
for beverage vending machines, under
the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the procedures and
policies published on February 19,
2003. In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE certified that the proposed
rule, if adopted, would not result in a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. DOE did not
receive comments on the economic
impacts of the test procedure. Therefore,
DOE continues to certify that the test
procedure amendments set forth in this
final rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for this
certification is set forth below.
For the BVM manufacturing industry,
the Small Business Administration
(SBA) has set a size threshold, which
defines those entities classified as
‘‘small businesses’’ for the purpose of
the statute. DOE used the SBA’s size
standards to determine whether any
small entities would be required to
comply with the rule. The size
standards are codified at 13 CFR part
121. The size standards are listed by the
North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code and industry
description, and are available at
www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/
Size_Standards_Table.pdf. In the 2007
version of the NAICS codes, BVM
manufacturers were classified under
NAICS 333311, ‘‘Automatic Vending
Machine Manufacturing.’’ The SBA set
a threshold of 500 employees or less for
an entity to be considered as a small
business for this category. The 2011
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Certification, Compliance, &
Enforcement final rule (herein referred
to as 2011 CC&E final rule) indicates
that the NAICS code associated with
beverage vending machines was 333311
and the small business threshold was
500 employees as of the date of that
final rule 76 FR 12422, 12448 (March 7,
2011). In 2012, NAICS published an
updated set of codes that contained
some significant changes in the
classification of various manufacturing
industries from those established in
2007 and referenced in the CC&E final
rule, including consolidating
manufacturers that were previously
classified under 333311 to NAICS code
333318. 77 FR 49991, 50000 (Aug. 20,
2012). As prescribed by the 2012 NAICS
code updates, in this final rule (as well
as in the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR) DOE has referenced the 2012
NAICS code 333318, ‘‘Other
Commercial and Service Industry
Machinery Manufacturing,’’ as
applicable to BVM manufacturers. The
SBA sets a threshold of 1,000 employees
or less for an entity to be considered as
a small business for this category.
DOE conducted a market survey of
manufacturers of equipment covered by
this rulemaking using all available
public information. DOE’s research
involved the review of individual
company Web sites and marketing
research tools (e.g., Dun and Bradstreet
reports, Manta) to create a list of
companies that manufacture or sell
beverage vending machines covered by
this rulemaking. Using these sources,
DOE identified eight manufacturers of
beverage vending machines.
DOE then reviewed the data to
determine whether the entities met the
SBA’s definition of a small business
manufacturer of beverage vending
machines and screened out companies
that do not offer equipment covered by
this rulemaking, do not meet the
definition of a ‘‘small business,’’ or are
foreign owned and operated. Based on
this review, DOE has identified four
companies that would be considered
small manufacturers; this represents 50
percent of the national BVM
manufacturers.
Table IV.1 groups the small
businesses according to their number of
employees. The smallest company has 2
employees and the largest company has
375 employees. According to DOE’s
analysis, total annual revenues
associated with these small
manufacturers were estimated at $108.5
million ($27.1 million average annual
revenue per small manufacturer).
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
45789
TABLE IV.1—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE BY NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
Number of
small
businesses
Number of employees
Percentage of
small
businesses
Cumulative
percentage
1–50 .............................................................................................................................................
51–100 .........................................................................................................................................
101–1000 .....................................................................................................................................
1
1
2
25.0
25.0
50.0
25.0
50.0
100.0
Total ......................................................................................................................................
4
........................
........................
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
* The total annual revenue for all small business is calculated as the average annual revenue per small business in each employee size bin
multiplied by the number of small businesses in that bin. Note, the value in the total value may not correspond directly to the average data due
to rounding.
This final rule updates and
incorporates several additional
amendments to clarify ambiguities in
the industry test procedure incorporated
by reference into the DOE test procedure
for beverage vending machines. In
addition, DOE is incorporating revisions
to the DOE test procedure that:
(1) Eliminate testing at the 90 °F
ambient test condition,
(2) clarify the test procedure for
combination vending machines,
(3) clarify the requirements for
loading BVM models under the DOE test
procedure,
(4) clarify the specifications of the test
package,
(5) clarify the next-to-vend beverage
temperature test condition,
(6) specify placement of
thermocouples during the DOE test
procedure,
(7) establish testing provisions at the
lowest application product temperature,
(8) clarify the treatment of certain
accessories when conducting the DOE
test procedure, and
(9) add a method to account for
energy impacts of low power modes.
Manufacturers are currently required
to test Class A and Class B beverage
vending machines using the DOE test
procedure established in the 2006 BVM
test procedure final rule (71 FR 71340;
Dec. 8, 2006) to show compliance with
existing energy conservation standards
established in the 2009 BVM energy
conservation standard final rule (74 FR
44914; Aug. 31, 2009). That test
procedure incorporates by reference
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–2004 and
ANSI/AHAM HRF–1–2004, and consists
of one 24-hour test at standard rating
conditions to determine the DEC of
covered beverage vending machines
during a representative cycle of use. 71
FR 71340, 71355 (Dec. 8, 2006). DOE
estimates the cost of conducting the
DOE current test procedure to be $5,000
for each BVM unit for the 24-hour test.
Six of the amendments in this test
procedure final rule will not change the
testing burden for refrigerated beverage
vending machines. These amendments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
serve only to establish new definitions
and provide clarification to DOE’s
existing test procedure requirements. As
discussed in section III.A.1 of this final
rule, updating the reference to an
industry test procedure and other minor
clarifications of the referenced industry
test procedure will not change the test
procedure burden because it will not
change the technical requirements of the
test procedure. Other amendments that
do not change the testing burden for
refrigerated beverage vending machines
include the amendments regarding the
test procedure for combination vending
machines, loading the vending
machines when conducting the test
procedure, specifying the characteristics
of the test package, clarifying the nextto-vend temperature test condition, and
specifying the placement of
thermocouples during testing.
The remaining amendments in this
test procedure rule may affect the test
procedure burden and the expected
incremental increases or decreases in
cost for conducting the test procedure
are discussed in the following
paragraphs.
DOE estimated the cost of labor using
an average hourly salary of $42.65 for an
engineer.17 Including fringe benefits,
which are estimated to be 30 percent of
total compensation, the total hourly cost
to an employer is estimated to be
$55.45.18
Eliminating testing at the 90 °F
ambient test condition will substantially
lessen the testing burden on
manufacturers, as it decreases the
testing requirements from two tests to
one test per BVM unit. DOE estimates
this decrease in burden to be 10 hours
of labor and 60 hours of facility use,
which reduces the testing cost for each
17 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics. 2014. National Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates. Washington, DC.
Available at www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_
nat.htm#17–0000.
18 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics. 2014. Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation—Management, Professional, and
Related Employees. Washington, DC. Available at:
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
BVM unit by roughly $2,500, or half the
cost of conducting the existing test
procedure.
Establishing testing provisions at the
lowest application product temperature
affects only a very small percentage of
equipment on the market, estimated to
be less than 2 percent of shipments.
Manufacturers who make equipment
affected by this provision should
experience a decrease in burden because
they will no longer have to seek waivers
for equipment that cannot maintain the
36 °F ±1°F average next-to-vend
temperature for the duration of the test.
For these manufacturers, DOE estimates
this will save 4 hours of labor to
develop an alternate test procedure and
submit the waiver application for each
beverage vending machine basic model,
or $221.80 for each beverage vending
machine basic model.
Clarifying the treatment of various
components and accessories in the DOE
test procedure should not alter the
technical requirements of the DOE test
procedure, because these additional
specifications are meant to clarify
existing requirements. However, DOE
understands that the treatment of some
of these accessories and components
may have been inconsistent due to the
lack of clarity or misinterpretation of the
DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE is
accounting for the incremental burden
associated with properly configuring
BVM models for testing in accordance
with these clarified component
specifications. The specific
clarifications pertain to money
processing devices, interior lighting,
external displays and screens, antisweat heaters, condensate pan heaters
and pumps, illuminated temperature
displays, condenser filters, security
covers, coated coils, general purpose
outlets, and crankcase heaters and
electric resistance heaters for cold
weather. The adjustments to these
accessories will require additional
attention by the engineers conducting
the test. DOE estimates the additional
cost to be $110.90 for each model tested
based on 1 hour of an engineer’s time
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45790
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
to make all the applicable adjustments
to the components and accessories prior
to testing and 1 hour of an engineer’s
time to attend to the components and
accessories of the model during testing.
Amendments in this final rule that
expand the testing methodology to
incorporate lighting and control settings
to account for low power modes will
require additional attention by test
personnel. Regarding the accessory low
power test, DOE estimates it will require
1 hour to make any necessary
adjustments to begin low power mode
operation at that time. During the active
vending mode test procedure, DOE
estimates that it will take a maximum of
10 additional hours of an engineer’s
time to periodically monitor the
operation of the tested unit and interact
with the unit, if necessary to ensure that
the unit does not re-enter a low power
mode state. DOE does not believe that
multiplying the DEC by 0.97 to account
for refrigeration low power mode will
increase the burden associated with
conducting the DOE test procedure.
However, DOE is also proposing an
optional refrigeration low power mode
verification test that manufacturers may
elect to perform to ensure their
equipment meets the requirements of a
refrigeration low power mode, which
would increase the test burden. DOE
estimates that this test would require an
additional 4 hours of test time, 2 hours
to allow the refrigeration low power
mode to initiate and maintain the
adjusted refrigeration state, and an
assumed 2 hours to return to 36 °F ± 1
°F to verify that the BVM model can
automatically return to vending
conditions. DOE estimates the
incremental costs associated with
conducting the low power mode test as
$609.95 for each model tested, based on
the assumption that it would take an
engineer an additional 11 hours to
attend to the tested model. Including the
optional refrigeration low power mode
verification test method, the
incremental cost of the low power mode
test procedure amendments is $831.75.
All of the amendments and
clarifications in this final rule, taken
together, will result in an overall
reduction in burden for small
manufacturers conducting the DOE test
procedure, primarily due to the removal
of the requirement to test at the 90 °F
ambient condition. On average, the cost
of testing covered beverage vending
machines would be reduced by
approximately $1,650 per basic model,
or by 34 percent per small
manufacturer, not including the
optional tests that are not required for
certification of BVM models. Table IV.2
summarizes the amendments in this
final rule that impact manufacturer
burden. However, note that different test
procedure provisions are applicable to
different BVM models and
configurations and, as such, the sum of
these provisions does not represent the
‘‘total incremental change in burden’’
for each tested BVM model under the
test procedure amendments adopted in
this final rule.
TABLE IV.2—SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS THAT IMPACT MANUFACTURER BURDEN
Provision
Change in burden (per model tested)
Explanation
Eliminate 90 °F ambient test condition ..............
¥$2,500 ...........................................................
Lowest application product temperature testing
(for certain models).
Treatment of accessories ...................................
Low power mode test .........................................
¥221.80 ...........................................................
Reduces half the cost of the 2006 BVM test
procedure.
4 hours of engineer’s time.
Based on the criteria outlined above,
DOE certifies that the test procedure
amendments would not have a
‘‘significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.’’
DOE has transmitted the certification
and supporting statement of factual
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the SBA for review under 5 U.S.C.
605(b).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of beverage vending
machines must certify to DOE that their
products comply with any applicable
energy conservation standards. In
certifying compliance, manufacturers
must test their products according to the
DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines, including any
amendments adopted for the test
procedure. DOE has established
regulations for the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for all
covered consumer products and
commercial equipment, including
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
110.90 ..............................................................
609.95 ..............................................................
831.75 (with optional refrigeration low power
mode test).
beverage vending machines. (76 FR
12422 (March 7, 2011). DOE recently
revised its estimated certification and
record keeping requirements to an
average of 30 hours per response,
including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
80 FR 5099 (Jan. 30, 2015). The
collection-of-information requirement
for the certification and recordkeeping
is subject to review and approval by
OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA). This updated certification
requirement has been approved by OMB
under OMB control number 1910–1400.
Id.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2 hours of engineer’s time.
11 hours of engineer’s time.
15 hours of engineer’s time.
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this final rule, DOE amends its test
procedure for beverage vending
machines. DOE has determined that this
rule falls into a class of actions that are
categorically excluded from review
under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) and DOE’s implementing
regulations at 10 CFR part 1021.
Specifically, this rule amends an
existing rule without affecting the
amount, quality or distribution of
energy usage, and, therefore, will not
result in any environmental impacts.
Thus, this rulemaking is covered by
Categorical Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR
part 1021, subpart D, which applies to
any rulemaking that interprets or
amends an existing rule without
changing the environmental effect of
that rule. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’
64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on agencies
formulating and implementing policies
or regulations that preempt State law or
that have Federalism implications. The
Executive Order requires agencies to
examine the constitutional and statutory
authority supporting any action that
would limit the policymaking discretion
of the States and to carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. The
Executive Order also requires agencies
to have an accountable process to
ensure meaningful and timely input by
State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have Federalism implications. On
March 14, 2000, DOE published a
statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental consultation process
it will follow in the development of
such regulations. 65 FR at 13735. DOE
examined this final rule and determined
that it will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. EPCA
governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to
energy conservation for the products
that are the subject of this final rule.
States can petition DOE for exemption
from such preemption to the extent, and
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is
required by Executive Order 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of
Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice
Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996),
imposes on Federal agencies the general
duty to adhere to the following
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity; (2) write
regulations to minimize litigation; (3)
provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct rather than a general
standard; and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of
Executive Order 12988 specifically
requires that Executive agencies make
every reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly
specifies any effect on existing Federal
law or regulation; (3) provides a clear
legal standard for affected conduct
while promoting simplification and
burden reduction; (4) specifies the
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order
12988 requires Executive agencies to
review regulations in light of applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to
determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of
them. DOE has completed the required
review and determined that, to the
extent permitted by law, this final rule
meets the relevant standards of
Executive Order 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires
each Federal agency to assess the effects
of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec.
201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a
regulatory action resulting in a rule that
may cause the expenditure by State,
local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section
202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency
to publish a written statement that
estimates the resulting costs, benefits,
and other effects on the national
economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The
UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit
timely input by elected officers of State,
local, and Tribal governments on a
proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental
mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan
for giving notice and opportunity for
timely input to potentially affected
small governments before establishing
any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE
published a statement of policy on its
process for intergovernmental
consultation under UMRA. 62 FR at
12820; also available at https://
energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
DOE examined this final rule according
to UMRA and its statement of policy
and determined that the rule contains
neither an intergovernmental mandate,
nor a mandate that may result in the
expenditure of $100 million or more in
any year, so these requirements do not
apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires
Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45791
that may affect family well-being. This
final rule will not have any impact on
the autonomy or integrity of the family
as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has
concluded that it is not necessary to
prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive
Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions
and Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859
(March 18, 1988), that this regulation
will not result in any takings that might
require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides
for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the
public under guidelines established by
each agency pursuant to general
guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed
this final rule under the OMB and DOE
guidelines and has concluded that it is
consistent with applicable policies in
those guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR at 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal
agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any
significant energy action. A ‘‘significant
energy action’’ is defined as any action
by an agency that promulgated or is
expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866, or any successor order; and (2)
is likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (3) is designated by the
Administrator of OIRA as a significant
energy action. For any significant energy
action, the agency must give a detailed
statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use if the
regulation is implemented, and of
reasonable alternatives to the action and
their expected benefits on energy
supply, distribution, and use.
This regulatory action is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it
would not have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45792
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
of energy, nor has it been designated as
a significant energy action by the
Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is
not a significant energy action, and,
accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department
of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95–
91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply
with section 32 of the Federal Energy
Administration Act of 1974, as amended
by the Federal Energy Administration
Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C.
788; FEAA) Section 32 essentially
provides in relevant part that, where a
proposed rule authorizes or requires use
of commercial standards, the notice of
proposed rulemaking must inform the
public of the use and background of
such standards. In addition, section
32(c) requires DOE to consult with the
Attorney General and the Chairman of
the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
concerning the impact of the
commercial or industry standards on
competition.
This rule incorporates testing
methods contained in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010, ‘‘Methods of
Testing for Rating Vending Machines for
Sealed Beverages.’’ DOE has evaluated
this standard and is unable to conclude
whether it fully complies with the
requirements of section 32(b) of the
Federal Energy Administration Act (i.e.,
whether they were developed in a
manner that fully provides for public
participation, comment, and review).
DOE has consulted with both the
Attorney General and the Chairman of
the FTC about the impact on
competition of using the methods
contained in this standard and has
received no comments objecting to their
use.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will
report to Congress on the promulgation
of this rule before its effective date. The
report will state that it has been
determined that the rule is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
N. Description of Standards
Incorporated by Reference
In this final rule, DOE is incorporating
by reference a method of test published
by ASHRAE and ANSI, titled ‘‘Methods
of Testing for Rating Vending Machines
for Sealed Beverages,’’ ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010. ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010 is an industryaccepted standard used to specify
methods of testing for rating the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
capacity and efficiency of selfcontained, mechanically refrigerated
vending machines for sealed beverages.
The DOE test procedure codified by this
final rule references ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1–2010. Copies of ASHRAE
standards may be purchased from the
American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers; 1791 Tullie Circle, NE.
Atlanta, GA 30329, 404–636–8400, or
www.ashrae.org.
V. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this final rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Confidential business information,
Energy conservation, Household
appliances, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 15,
2015.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and
431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 429—CERTIFICATION,
COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT
FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 429
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317.
2. Section 429.52 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
■
§ 429.52 Refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a
certification report must include the
following additional public, equipmentspecific information:
(i) When using appendix A of subpart
Q of part 431of this chapter, the daily
energy consumption in kilowatt hours
per day (kWh/day), the refrigerated
volume (V) in cubic feet (ft3), whether
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
testing was conducted with payment
mechanism in place and operational,
and, if applicable, the lowest
application product temperature in
degrees Fahrenheit (°F), if applicable.
(ii) When using appendix B of subpart
Q of part 431of this chapter, the daily
energy consumption in kilowatt hours
per day (kWh/day), the refrigerated
volume (V) in cubic feet (ft3), whether
testing was conducted with payment
mechanism in place and operational,
whether testing was conducted using an
accessory low power mode, whether
rating was based on the presence of a
refrigeration low power mode, and, if
applicable, the lowest application
product temperature in degrees
Fahrenheit (°F).
PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
3. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317.
4. Section 431.291 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 431.291
Scope.
This subpart specifies test procedures
and energy conservation standards for
certain commercial refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machines,
pursuant to part A of Title III of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309. The
regulatory provisions of §§ 430.33 and
430.34 and subparts D and E of part 430
of this chapter are applicable to
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines.
■ 5. Section 431.292 is amended by
revising the definitions of ‘‘Refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending
machine’’ and ‘‘V’’ to read as follows:
§ 431.292 Definitions concerning
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines.
*
*
*
*
*
Refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machine means a
commercial refrigerator (as defined at
§ 431.62) that cools bottled or canned
beverages and dispenses the bottled or
canned beverages on payment.
*
*
*
*
*
V means the refrigerated volume (ft3)
of the refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machine, as measured
by Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293).
■ 6. Section 431.293 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
§ 431.293 Materials incorporated by
reference.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) ASHRAE. American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, 1791 Tullie
Circle, NE. Atlanta, GA 30329, 404–
636–8400, or www.ashrae.org.
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1–
2010, (‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1’’),
‘‘Methods of Testing for Rating Vending
Machines for Sealed Beverages,’’
approved July 23, 2010, IBR approved
for § 431.292 and appendices A and B
to subpart Q of this part.
(2) [Reserved]
■ 7. Section 431.294 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 431.294 Uniform test method for the
measurement of energy consumption of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Testing and Calculations.
Determine the daily energy
consumption of each covered
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine by conducting the
appropriate test procedure set forth in
appendix A or B to this subpart.
§ 431.296
[Amended]
8. Section 431.296 is amended by
removing the word ‘‘maximum’’ after
‘‘shall have a’’ in the introductory text.
■ 9. Subpart Q of part 431 is amended
by adding appendices A and B to read
as follows:
■
Appendix A to Subpart Q of Part 431—
Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Refrigerated Bottled or Canned
Beverage Vending Machines
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Note: Prior to January 27, 2016,
manufacturers must make any
representations with respect to the energy
use or efficiency of refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with the results of testing
pursuant to this Appendix A or the
procedures in 10 CFR 431.294 as it appeared
in the edition of 10 CFR parts 200 to 499
revised as of January 1, 2015. Any
representations made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of such refrigerated
beverage vending machines must be in
accordance with whichever version is
selected. On or after January 27, 2016,
manufacturers must make any
representations with respect to energy use or
efficiency in accordance with the results of
testing pursuant to this Appendix A to
demonstrate compliance with the energy
conservation standards at 10 CFR 431.296,
for which compliance was required as of
August 31, 2012.
1. General. Section 3, ‘‘Definitions’’;
section 4, ‘‘Instruments’’; section 5,
‘‘Vendible Capacity’’; section 6, ‘‘Test
Conditions’’; section 7.1, ‘‘Test Procedures—
General Requirements’’; and section 7.2,
‘‘Energy Consumption Test’’ of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference; see
§ 431.293) apply to this appendix except as
noted throughout this appendix. In cases
where there is a conflict, the language of the
test procedure in this appendix takes
precedence over ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
1.1. Instruments. In addition to the
instrument accuracy requirements in section
4, ‘‘Instruments,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293),
humidity shall be measured with a calibrated
instrument accurate to ±2 percent RH at the
specified ambient relative humidity
condition specified in section 2.1.2 of this
appendix.
1.2. Definitions. In addition to the
definitions specified in section 3,
‘‘Definitions,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293),
the following definition is also applicable to
this appendix.
External accessory standby mode means
the mode of operation in which any external,
integral customer display signs, lighting, or
digital screens:
(1) Are connected to mains power;
(2) Do not produce the intended
illumination, display, or interaction
functionality; and
(3) Can be switched into another mode
automatically with only a remote usergenerated or an internal signal.
Instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature means the spatial
average of all standard test packages in the
next-to-vend beverages positions at a given
time.
Integrated average temperature means the
average temperature of all standard test
package measurements in the next-to-vend
beverage positions taken over the duration of
the test, expressed in degrees Fahrenheit (°F).
Lowest application product temperature
means the lowest integrated average
temperature a given basic model is capable
of maintaining so as to comply with the
temperature stabilization requirements
specified in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293).
2. Test Procedure.
2.1. Test Conditions. The test conditions
specified in section 6, ‘‘Test Conditions,’’ of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293) apply to this
45793
appendix except that in section 6.1, ‘‘Voltage
and Frequency,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, the
voltage and frequency tolerances specified in
section 6.1.a of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 also
apply equivalently to section 6.1.b of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 for equipment with dual
nameplate voltages.
2.1.1. Average Beverage Temperature. The
integrated average temperature measured
during the test must be within ±1 °F of the
value specified in Table A.1 of this appendix
or the lowest application product
temperature for models tested in accordance
with paragraph 2.1.3 of this appendix. The
measurement of integrated average
temperature must begin after temperature
stabilization has been achieved and continue
for the following 24 consecutive hours. All
references to ‘‘Table 1’’ in ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293) shall instead be interpreted as
references to Table A.1 of this appendix and
all references to ‘‘average beverage
temperature’’ in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 shall
instead be interpreted as references to the
integrated average temperature as defined in
section 1.2 of this appendix of this subpart,
except as noted in section 2.1.1.1 of this
appendix.
2.1.1.1. Temperature Stabilization.
Temperature stabilization shall be
determined in accordance with section
7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated
by reference § 431.293), except that the
reference to ‘‘average beverage temperature’’
shall instead refer to the ‘‘instantaneous
average next-to-vend beverage temperature,’’
as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix,
and the reference to ‘‘Table 1’’ shall instead
refer to Table A.1 of this appendix. That is,
temperature stabilization is considered to be
achieved 24 hours after the instantaneous
average next-to-vend beverage temperature
reaches the specified value (see Table A.1)
and energy consumption for two successive
6 hour periods are within 2 percent of each
other.
2.1.2. Ambient Test Conditions. The
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine must be tested at the test
conditions and tolerances specified in the
following Table A.1 of this appendix. The
specified ambient temperature and humidity
conditions shall be maintained within the
ranges specified for each recorded
measurement. All references to ‘‘Table 1’’ in
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293) shall instead be
interpreted as references to Table A.1 of this
appendix. In contrast to the requirements of
section 6.1 and Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1, conduct testing only one time at the
conditions referenced in Table A.1 of this
appendix. Testing at alternate ambient
conditions is not required or permitted.
TABLE A.1—AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY SPECIFIED VALUE AND TOLERANCE
Acceptable range
(based on value and tolerance)
Test and pretest condition
Value
Tolerance
Instantaneous Average Next-to-Vend Temperature.
Integrated Average Temperature .....................
36 °F ...........................
±1 °F ...........................
35–37 °F.
36 °F ...........................
±1 °F ...........................
N/A (value is averaged throughout test).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45794
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE A.1—AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY SPECIFIED VALUE AND TOLERANCE—Continued
Value
75 °F ...........................
45 percent RH ............
±2 °F ...........................
±5 percent RH ............
2.1.3. Lowest Application Product
Temperature. If a refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine is not
capable of maintaining an integrated average
temperature of 36 °F (±1 °F) during the 24
hour test period, the unit must be tested at
the lowest application product temperature,
as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix.
For refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines equipped with a
thermostat, the lowest application product
temperature is the integrated average
temperature achieved at the lowest
thermostat setting.
2.2. Equipment Installation and Test Set
Up. Except as provided in this appendix, the
test procedure for energy consumption of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines shall be conducted in
accordance with the methods specified in
sections 7.1 through 7.2.2.3 under ‘‘Test
Procedures’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293).
2.2.1. Equipment Loading. Configure
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines to hold the maximum
number of standard products in the
refrigerated compartment(s) and place
standard test packages as specified in section
2.2.1.1 or 2.2.1.2 of this appendix.
2.2.1.1. Placement of Standard Test
Packages for Equipment with Products
Arranged Horizontally. For refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machines
with products arranged horizontally (e.g., on
shelves or in product spirals), place standard
test packages in the refrigerated
compartment(s) in the following locations, as
shown in Figure A.1:
(a) For odd-number shelves, when
counting starting from the bottom shelf,
standard test packages shall be placed at:
(1) The left-most next-to-vend product
location,
(2) The right-most next-to-vend product
location, and
(3) For equipment with greater than or
equal to five next-to-vend product locations
on each shelf, either:
(A) The next-to-vend product location in
the center of the shelf (i.e., equidistant from
the left-most and right-most next-to-vend
product locations) if there are an odd number
of next-to-vend products on the shelf or
Acceptable range
(based on value and tolerance)
Tolerance
Ambient Temperature .......................................
Relative Humidity .............................................
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Test and pretest condition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
73–77 °F.
40–50 percent RH.
(B) The next-to-vend product location
immediately to the right and the left of the
center position if there are an even number
of next-to-vend products on the shelf.
(b) For even-numbered shelves, when
counting from the bottom shelf, standard test
packages shall be places at either:
(1) For equipment with less than or equal
to six next-to-vend product locations on each
shelf, the next-to-vend product location(s):
(A) One location towards the center from
the left-most next-to-vend product location;
and
(B) One location towards to the center from
the right-most next-to-vend product location,
or
(2) For equipment with greater than six
next-to-vend product locations on each shelf,
the next-to-vend product locations
(A) Two locations towards the center from
the left-most next-to-vend product location;
and
(B) Two locations towards to the center
from the right-most next-to-vend product
location.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
2.2.1.2. Placement of Standard Test
Packages for Equipment with Products
Arranged Vertically. For refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machines with
products arranged vertically (e.g., in stacks),
place standard test packages in the
refrigerated compartment(s) in each next-tovend product location.
2.2.1.3. Loading of Combination Vending
Machines. For combination vending
machines, the non-refrigerated
compartment(s) must not be loaded with any
standard products, test packages, or other
vendible merchandise.
2.2.1.4. Standard Products. The standard
product shall be standard 12-ounce
aluminum beverage cans filled with a liquid
with a density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/
mL) ± 0.1 g/mL at 36 °F. For product storage
racks that are not capable of vending 12ounce cans, but are capable of vending 20ounce bottles, the standard product shall be
20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a liquid
with a density of 1.0 g/mL ± 0.1 g/mL at
36 °F. For product storage racks that are not
capable of vending 12-ounce cans or 20ounce bottles, the standard product shall be
the packaging and contents specified by the
manufacturer in product literature as the
standard product (i.e., the specific
merchandise the refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine is
designed to vend).
2.2.1.5. Standard Test Packages. A
standard test package is a standard product,
as specified in 2.2.1.4 of this appendix,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
altered to include a temperature-measuring
instrument at its center of mass.
2.2.2. Sensor Placement. The integrated
average temperature of next-to-vend
beverages shall be measured in standard test
packages in the next-to-vend product
locations specified in section 2.2.1.1 of this
appendix. Do not run the thermocouple wire
and other measurement apparatus through
the dispensing door; the thermocouple wire
and other measurement apparatus must be
configured and sealed so as to minimize air
flow between the interior refrigerated volume
and the ambient room air. If a manufacturer
chooses to employ a method other than
routing thermocouple and sensor wires
through the door gasket and ensuring the
gasket is compressed around the wire to
ensure a good seal, then it must maintain a
record of the method used in the data
underlying that basic model’s certification
pursuant to 10 CFR 429.71.
2.2.3. Accessories. (a) All standard
components that would be used during
normal operation of the model in the field
and are necessary to provide sufficient
functionality for cooling and vending
products in field installations (i.e., product
inventory, temperature management, product
merchandising (including, e.g., lighting or
signage), product selection, and product
transport and delivery) shall be in place
during testing and shall be set to the
maximum energy-consuming setting if
manually adjustable, except that the specific
components and accessories listed in the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45795
subsequent sections shall be operated as
stated. Components not necessary for the
inventory, temperature management, product
merchandising (e.g., lighting or signage),
product selection, and or product transport
and delivery shall be de-energized. If systems
not required for the primary functionality of
the machine as stated in this section cannot
be de-energized without preventing the
operation of the machine, then they shall be
placed in the lowest energy consuming state.
(b) Instead of testing pursuant to section
7.2.2.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated
by reference, see § 431.293), provide, if
necessary, any physical stimuli or other
input to the machine needed to prevent
automatic activation of energy management
systems that can be adjusted by the machine
operator during the test period. Automatic
energy management systems that cannot be
adjusted by the machine operator may be
enabled, as specified by section 7.2.1 of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
2.2.3.1. Payment Mechanisms. Refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machines
shall be tested with no payment mechanism
in place, the payment mechanism in place
but de-energized, or the payment mechanism
in place but set to the lowest energy
consuming state, if it cannot be de-energized.
A default payment mechanism energy
consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day shall be
added to the primary rated energy
consumption per day, as required in section
2.3 of this appendix.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
ER31JY15.023</GPH>
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45796
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
2.2.3.2. Internal Lighting. All lighting that
is contained within or is part of the internal
physical boundary of the refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machine, as
established by the top, bottom, and side
panels of the equipment, shall be placed in
its maximum energy consuming state.
2.2.3.3. External Customer Display Signs,
Lights, and Digital Screens. All external
customer display signs, lights, and digital
screens that are independent from the
refrigeration or vending performance of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine must be disconnected,
disabled, or otherwise de-energized for the
duration of testing. Customer display signs,
lighting, and digital screens that are
integrated into the beverage vending machine
cabinet or controls such that they cannot be
de-energized without disabling the
refrigeration or vending functions of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine or modifying the circuitry
must be placed in external accessory standby
mode, if available, or their lowest energyconsuming state. Digital displays that also
serve a vending or money processing
function must be placed in the lowest energyconsuming state that still allows the money
processing feature to function.
2.2.3.4. Anti-sweat and Other Electric
Resistance Heaters. Anti-sweat and other
electric resistance heaters must be
operational during the entirety of the test
procedure. Units with a user-selectable
setting must have the heaters energized and
set to the most energy-consumptive position.
Units featuring an automatic, non-useradjustable controller that turns on or off
based on environmental conditions must be
operating in the automatic state. Units that
are not shipped with a controller from the
point of manufacture, but are intended to be
used with a controller, must be equipped
with an appropriate controller when tested.
2.2.3.5. Condensate Pan Heaters and
Pumps. All electric resistance condensate
heaters and condensate pumps must be
installed and operational during the test.
Prior to the start of the test, including the 24
hour period used to determine temperature
stabilization, as described in ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 section 7.2.2.2 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293), the condensate pan
must be dry. For the duration of the test,
including the 24 hour time period necessary
for temperature stabilization, allow any
condensate moisture generated to accumulate
in the pan. Do not manually add or remove
water from the condensate pan at any time
during the test.
2.2.3.6. Illuminated Temperature Displays.
All illuminated temperature displays must be
energized and operated during the test the
same way they would be energized and
operated during normal field operation, as
recommended in manufacturer product
literature, including manuals.
2.2.3.7. Condenser Filters. Remove any
nonpermanent filters provided to prevent
particulates from blocking a model’s
condenser coil.
2.2.3.8. Security Covers. Remove any
devices used to secure the model from theft
or tampering.
2.2.3.9. General Purpose Outlets. During
the test, do not connect any external load to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
any general purpose outlets available on a
unit.
2.2.3.10. Crankcase Heaters and Other
Electric Resistance Heaters for Cold Weather.
Crankcase heaters and other electric
resistance heaters for cold weather must be
operational during the test. If a control
system, such as a thermostat or electronic
controller, is used to modulate the operation
of the heater, it must be activated during the
test and operated in accordance with the
manufacturer’s instructions.
2.2.4. Sampling and Recording of Data.
Record the data listed in section 7.2.2.3 of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293) at least every 1
minute. For the purpose of this subsection,
‘‘average beverage temperature,’’ listed in
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, means
‘‘instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature.’’
2.3. Determination of Daily Energy
Consumption. Determine the daily energy
consumption of each tested refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machine
as the sum of:
(a) The default payment mechanism energy
consumption value from section 2.2.3.1 of
this appendix and
(b) The primary rated energy consumption
per day (ED), in kWh, and determined in
accordance with the calculation procedure in
section 7.2.3.1, ‘‘Calculation of Daily Energy
Consumption,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293).
2.3.1. Calculations and Rounding. In all
cases, the primary rated energy consumption
per day (ED) must be calculated with raw
measured values and rounded to units of 0.01
kWh/day.
3. Determination of Refrigerated Volume,
Vendible Capacity, and Surface Area.
3.1. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the
‘‘refrigerated volume’’ of refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with appendix C, ‘‘Measurement
of Volume,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293).
For combination vending machines, the
‘‘refrigerated volume’’ does not include any
non-refrigerated compartments.
3.2. Vendible Capacity. Determine the
‘‘vendible capacity’’ of refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with the first paragraph of section
5, ‘‘Vending Machine Capacity,’’ of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1, (incorporated by reference,
see § 431.293). For combination vending
machines, the ‘‘vendible capacity’’ includes
only the capacity of any portion of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine that is refrigerated and does
not include the capacity of the nonrefrigerated compartment(s).
Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 431—
Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Refrigerated Bottled or Canned
Beverage Vending Machines
Note: After January 27, 2016,
manufacturers must make any
representations with respect to energy use or
efficiency in accordance with the results of
testing pursuant to appendix A of this
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
subpart to demonstrate compliance with the
energy conservation standards at 10 CFR
431.296, for which compliance was required
as of August 31, 2012. Alternatively,
manufacturers may make representations
based on testing in accordance with this
appendix prior to the compliance date of any
amended energy conservation standards,
provided that such representations
demonstrate compliance with such amended
energy conservation standards. Any
representations made on or after the
compliance date of any amended energy
conservation standards, must be made in
accordance with the results of testing
pursuant to this appendix. Any
representations made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of such refrigerated
beverage vending machines must be in
accordance with whichever version is
selected.
1. General. Section 3, ‘‘Definitions’’;
section 4, ‘‘Instruments’’; section 5,
‘‘Vendible Capacity’’; section 6, ‘‘Test
Conditions’’; section 7.1, ‘‘Test Procedures—
General Requirements’’; and section 7.2,
‘‘Energy Consumption Test’’ of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference; see
§ 431.293) apply to this appendix except as
noted throughout this appendix. In cases
where there is a conflict, the language of the
test procedure in this appendix takes
precedence over ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
1.1. Instruments. In addition to the
instrument accuracy requirements in section
3, ‘‘Instruments,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293),
humidity shall be measured with a calibrated
instrument accurate to ±2 percent RH at the
specified ambient relative humidity
condition specified in section 2.1.3 of this
appendix.
1.2. Definitions. In addition to the
definitions specified in section 3,
‘‘Definitions,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293) the
following definitions are also applicable to
this appendix.
Accessory low power mode means a state
in which a beverage vending machine’s
lighting and/or other energy-using systems
are in low power mode, but that is not a
refrigeration low power mode. Functions that
may constitute an accessory low power mode
may include, for example, dimming or
turning off lights, but does not include
adjustment of the refrigeration system to
elevate the temperature of the refrigerated
compartment(s).
External accessory standby mode means
the mode of operation in which any external,
integral customer display signs, lighting, or
digital screens are connected to mains power;
do not produce the intended illumination,
display, or interaction functionality; and can
be switched into another mode automatically
with only a remote user-generated or an
internal signal.
Instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature means the spatial
average of all standard test packages in the
next-to-vend beverages positions at a given
time.
Integrated average temperature means the
average temperature of all standard test
package measurements in the next-to-vend
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
beverage positions taken over the duration of
the test, expressed in degrees Fahrenheit (°F).
Low power mode means a state in which
a beverage vending machine’s lighting,
refrigeration, and/or other energy-using
systems are automatically adjusted (without
user intervention) such that they consume
less energy than they consume in an active
vending environment.
Lowest application product temperature
means the lowest integrated average
temperature a given basic model is capable
of maintaining so as to comply with the
temperature stabilization requirements
specified in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293).
Refrigeration low power mode means a
state in which a beverage vending machine’s
refrigeration system is in low power mode
because of elevation of the temperature of the
refrigerated compartment(s). To qualify as
low power mode, the unit must satisfy the
requirements described in section 2.3.2.1 of
this appendix.
2. Test Procedure.
2.1. Test Conditions. The test conditions
specified in section 6, ‘‘Test Conditions’’ of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293) apply to this
appendix except that in section 6.1, ‘‘Voltage
and Frequency,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, the
voltage and frequency tolerances specified in
section 6.1.a of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 also
apply equivalently to section 6.1.b of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 for equipment with dual
nameplate voltages.
2.1.1. Average Beverage Temperature. The
integrated average temperature measured
during the test must be within ±1 °F of the
value specified in Table B.1 of this appendix
or the lowest application product
temperature for models tested in accordance
with paragraph 2.1.3 of this appendix. The
measurement of integrated average
temperature must begin after temperature
stabilization has been achieve and continue
for the following 24 consecutive hours. All
references to ‘‘Table 1’’ in ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293) shall instead be interpreted as
references to Table B.1 of this appendix and
all references to ‘‘average beverage
temperature’’ in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 shall
instead be interpreted as references to the
integrated average temperature as defined in
section 1.2 of this appendix, except as noted
in section 2.1.1.1 of this appendix.
2.1.1.1. Temperature Stabilization.
Temperature stabilization shall be
determined in accordance with section
7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated
by reference § 431.293), except that the
reference to ‘‘average beverage temperature’’
45797
shall instead refer to the ‘‘instantaneous
average next-to-vend beverage temperature,’’
as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix,
and the reference to ‘‘Table 1’’ shall instead
refer to Table A.1 of this appendix. That is,
temperature stabilization is considered to be
achieved 24 hours after the instantaneous
average next-to-vend beverage temperature
reaches the specified value (see Table A.1)
and energy consumption for two successive
6 hour periods are within 2 percent of each
other.
2.1.2. Ambient Test Conditions. The
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine must be tested at the test
conditions and tolerances specified in the
following Table B.1 of this appendix. The
specified ambient temperature and humidity
conditions shall be maintained within the
ranges specified for each recorded
measurement. All references to ‘‘Table 1’’ in
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293) shall instead be
interpreted as references to Table B.1 of this
appendix. In contrast to the requirements of
section 6.1 and Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1, conduct testing only one time at the
conditions referenced in Table B.1 of this
appendix. Testing at alternate ambient
conditions is not required or permitted.
TABLE B.1—AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY SPECIFIED VALUE AND TOLERANCE
Acceptable range
(based on value and tolerance)
Value
Tolerance
Instantaneous Average Next-to-Vend Temperature.
Integrated Average Temperature .....................
Ambient Temperature .......................................
Relative Humidity .............................................
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Test and pretest condition
36 °F ...........................
±1 °F ...........................
35–37 °F.
36 °F ...........................
75 °F ...........................
45 percent RH ............
±1 °F ...........................
±2 °F ...........................
±5 percent RH ............
N/A (value is averaged throughout test).
73–77 °F.
40–50 percent RH.
2.1.3. Lowest Application Product
Temperature. If a refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine is not
capable of maintaining an integrated average
temperature of 36 °F (±1 °F) during the 24
hour test period, the unit must be tested at
the lowest application product temperature,
as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix.
For refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines equipped with a
thermostat, the lowest application product
temperature is the integrated average
temperature achieved at the lowest
thermostat setting.
2.2. Equipment Installation and Test Set
Up. Except as provided in this section 2.2 of
appendix, the test procedure for energy
consumption of refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines shall be
conducted in accordance with the methods
specified in sections 7.1 through 7.2.2.3
under ‘‘Test Procedures’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293).
2.2.1. Equipment Loading. Configure
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines to hold the maximum
number of standard products, and place
standard test packages in the refrigerated
compartment(s) as specified in section 2.2.1.1
or 2.2.1.2 of this appendix.
2.2.1.1. Placement of Standard Test
Packages for Equipment with Products
Arranged Horizontally. For refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machines
with products arranged horizontally (e.g., on
shelves or in product spirals), place standard
test packages in the refrigerated
compartment(s) in the following locations, as
shown in Figure B.1:
(a) For odd-number shelves, when
counting starting from the bottom shelf,
standard test packages shall be placed at:
(1) The left-most next-to-vend product
location;
(2) The right-most next-to-vend product
location; and
(3) For equipment with greater than or
equal to five product locations on each shelf,
either:
(i) The next-to-vend product location in the
center of the shelf (i.e., equidistant from the
left-most and right-most next-to-vend
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
product locations) if there are an odd number
of next-to-vend products on the shelf or,
(ii) The next-to-vend product location
immediately to the right and the left of the
center position if there are an even number
of next-to-vend products on the shelf.
(b) For even-numbered shelves, when
counting from the bottom shelf, standard test
packages shall be places at either:
(1) For equipment with less than or equal
to six next-to-vend product locations on each
shelf, the next-to-vend product location(s);
(i) One position towards the center from
the left-most next-to-vend product location;
and
(ii) One location towards to the center from
the right-most next-to-vend product location;
or
(2) For equipment with greater than six
next-to-vend product locations on each shelf,
the next-to-vend product locations:
(i) Two selections towards the center from
the left-most next-to-vend product location;
and
(ii) Two locations towards to the center
from the right-most next-to-vend product
location.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
2.2.1.2. Placement of Standard Test
Packages for Equipment with Products
Arranged Vertically. For refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machines with
products arranged vertically (e.g., in stacks),
place standard test packages in the
refrigerated compartment(s) in each next-tovend product location.
2.2.1.3. Loading of Combination Vending
Machines. For combination vending
machines, the non-refrigerated
compartment(s) must not be loaded with any
standard products, test packages, or other
vendible merchandise.
2.2.1.4. Standard Products. The standard
product shall be standard 12-ounce
aluminum beverage cans filled with a liquid
with a density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/
mL) ±0.1 g/mL at 36 °F. For product storage
racks that are not capable of vending 12ounce cans, but are capable of vending 20ounce bottles, the standard product shall be
20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a liquid
with a density of 1.0 g/mL ±0.1 g/mL at 36°F.
For product storage racks that are not capable
of vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce
bottles, the standard product shall be the
packaging and contents specified by the
manufacturer in product literature as the
standard product (i.e., the specific
merchandise the refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine is
designed to vend).
2.2.1.5. Standard Test Packages. A
standard test package is a standard product,
as specified in 2.2.1.4 of this appendix,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
altered to include a temperature-measuring
instrument at its center of mass.
2.2.2. Sensor Placement. The integrated
average temperature of next-to-vend
beverages shall be measured in standard test
packages in the next-to-vend product
locations specified in section 2.2.1.1 of this
appendix. Do not run the thermocouple wire
and other measurement apparatus through
the dispensing door; the thermocouple wire
and other measurement apparatus must be
configured and sealed so as to minimize air
flow between the interior refrigerated volume
and the ambient room air. If a manufacturer
chooses to employ a method other than
routing thermocouple and sensor wires
through the door gasket and ensuring the
gasket is compressed around the wire to
ensure a good seal, then it must maintain a
record of the method used in the data
underlying that basic model’s certification
pursuant to 10 CFR 429.71.
2.2.3. Vending Mode Test Period. The
vending mode test period begins after
temperature stabilization has been achieved,
as described in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section
7.2.2.2 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293) and continues for 18 hours for
equipment with an accessory low power
mode or for 24 hours for equipment without
an accessory low power mode. For the
vending mode test period, equipment that
has energy-saving features that cannot be
disabled shall have those features set to the
most energy-consuming settings, except for
as specified in section 2.2.4 of this appendix.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
In addition, all energy management systems
shall be disabled. Instead of testing pursuant
to sections 7.1.1(d) and 7.2.2.4 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1, provide, if necessary, any
physical stimuli or other input to the
machine needed to prevent automatic
activation of low power modes during the
vending mode test period.
2.2.4. Accessory Low Power Mode Test
Period. For equipment with an accessory low
power mode, the accessory low power mode
may be engaged for 6 hours, beginning 18
hours after the temperature stabilization
requirements established in section 7.2.2.2 of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293) have been achieved,
and continuing until the end of the 24-hour
test period. During the accessory low power
mode test, operate the refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine with the
lowest energy-consuming lighting and
control settings that constitute an accessory
low power mode. The specification and
tolerances for integrated average temperature
in Table B.1 of this appendix still apply, and
any refrigeration low power mode must not
be engaged. Instead of testing pursuant to
sections 7.1.1(d) and 7.2.2.4 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1, provide, if necessary, any
physical stimuli or other input to the
machine needed to prevent automatic
activation of refrigeration low power modes
during the accessory low power mode test
period.
2.2.5. Accessories. Unless specified
otherwise in this appendix, all standard
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
ER31JY15.024</GPH>
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45798
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
components that would be used during
normal operation of the basic model in the
field and are necessary to provide sufficient
functionality for cooling and vending
products in field installations (i.e., product
inventory, temperature management, product
merchandising(including, e.g., lighting or
signage), product selection, and product
transport and delivery) shall be in place
during testing and shall be set to the
maximum energy-consuming setting if
manually adjustable. Components not
necessary for the inventory, temperature
management, product merchandising (e.g.,
lighting or signage), product selection, or
product transport and delivery shall be deenergized. If systems not required for the
primary functionality of the machine as
stated in this section cannot be de-energized
without preventing the operation of the
machine, then they shall be placed in the
lowest energy consuming state Components
with controls that are permanently
operational and cannot be adjusted by the
machine operator shall be operated in their
normal setting and consistent with the
requirements of 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 of this
appendix. The specific components and
accessories listed in the subsequent sections
shall be operated as stated during the test,
except when controlled as part of a low
power mode during the low power mode test
period.
2.2.5.1 Payment Mechanisms. Refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machines
shall be tested with no payment mechanism
in place, the payment mechanism in-place
but de-energized, or the payment mechanism
in place but set to the lowest energy
consuming state, if it cannot be de-energized.
A default payment mechanism energy
consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day shall be
added to the primary rated energy
consumption per day, as noted in section 2.3
of this appendix.
2.2.5.2. Internal Lighting. All lighting that
is contained within or is part of the internal
physical boundary of the refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machine, as
established by the top, bottom, and side
panels of the equipment, shall be placed in
its maximum energy consuming state.
2.2.5.3. External Customer Display Signs,
Lights, and Digital Screens. All external
customer display signs, lights, and digital
screens that are independent from the
refrigeration or vending performance of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine must be disconnected,
disabled, or otherwise de-energized for the
duration of testing. Customer display signs,
lighting, and digital screens that are
integrated into the beverage vending machine
cabinet or controls such that they cannot be
de-energized without disabling the
refrigeration or vending functions of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine or modifying the circuitry
must be placed in external accessory standby
mode, if available, or their lowest energyconsuming state. Digital displays that also
serve a vending or money processing
function must be placed in the lowest energyconsuming state that still allows the money
processing feature to function.
2.2.5.4. Anti-sweat or Other Electric
Resistance Heaters. Anti-sweat or other
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
electric resistance heaters must be
operational during the entirety of the test
procedure. Units with a user-selectable
setting must have the heaters energized and
set to the most energy-consumptive position.
Units featuring an automatic, non-useradjustable controller that turns on or off
based on environmental conditions must be
operating in the automatic state. Units that
are not shipped with a controller from the
point of manufacture, but are intended to be
used with a controller, must be equipped
with an appropriate controller when tested.
2.2.5.5. Condensate Pan Heaters and
Pumps. All electric resistance condensate
heaters and condensate pumps must be
installed and operational during the test.
Prior to the start of the test, including the 24
hour period used to determine temperature
stabilization prior to the start of the test
period, as described in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
section 7.2.2.2 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293), the condensate pan must be dry.
For the duration of the test, including the 24
hour time period necessary for temperature
stabilization, allow any condensate moisture
generated to accumulate in the pan. Do not
manually add or remove water from the
condensate pan at any time during the test.
Any automatic controls that initiate the
operation of the condensate pan heater or
pump based on water level or ambient
conditions must be enabled and operated in
the automatic setting.
2.2.5.6. Illuminated Temperature Displays.
All illuminated temperature displays must be
energized and operated during the test the
same way they would be energized and
operated during normal field operation, as
recommended in manufacturer product
literature, including manuals.
2.2.5.7. Condenser Filters. Remove any
nonpermanent filters provided to prevent
particulates from blocking a model’s
condenser coil.
2.2.5.8. Security Covers. Remove any
devices used to secure the model from theft
or tampering.
2.2.5.9. General Purpose Outlets. During
the test, do not connect any external load to
any general purpose outlets available on a
unit.
2.2.5.10. Crankcase Heaters and Other
Electric Resistance Heaters for Cold Weather.
Crankcase heaters and other electric
resistance heaters for cold weather must be
operational during the test. If a control
system, such as a thermostat or electronic
controller, is used to modulate the operation
of the heater, it must be activated during the
test and operated in accordance with the
manufacturer’s instructions.
2.2.6. Sampling and Recording of Data.
Record the data listed in section 7.2.2.3 of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 431.293), at least every 1
minute. For the purpose of this section,
‘‘average beverage temperature,’’ listed in
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, means
‘‘instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature.’’
2.3. Determination of Daily Energy
Consumption. In section 7.2.3.1 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293), the primary rated energy
consumption per day (ED) shall be the energy
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
45799
measured during the vending mode test
period and accessory low power mode test
period, as specified in sections 2.2.3 and
2.2.4 of this appendix, as applicable.
2.3.1. Energy Consumption of Payment
Mechanisms. Calculate the sum of:
(a) The default payment mechanism energy
consumption value from section 2.2.5.1 and
(b) The primary rated energy consumption
per day (ED), in kWh, and determined in
accordance with the calculation procedure in
section 7.2.3.1, ‘‘Calculation of Daily Energy
Consumption,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293).
2.3.2. Refrigeration Low Power Mode. For
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines with a refrigeration low
power mode, multiply the value determined
in section 2.3.1 of this appendix by 0.97 to
determine the daily energy consumption of
the unit tested. For refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines without
a refrigeration low power mode, the value
determined in section 2.3.1 is the daily
energy consumption of the unit tested.
2.3.2.1. Refrigeration Low Power Mode
Validation Test Method. This test method is
not required for the certification of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines. To verify the existence of
a refrigeration low power mode, initiate the
refrigeration low power mode in accordance
with manufacturer instructions contained in
product literature and manuals, after
completion of the 6-hour low power mode
test period. Continue recording all the data
specified in section 2.2.6 of this appendix
until existence of a refrigeration low power
mode has been confirmed or denied. The
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine shall be deemed to have a
refrigeration low power mode if either:
(a) The following three requirements have
been satisfied:
(1) The instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature must reach at least 4 °F
above the integrated average temperature or
lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, within 6 hours.
(2) The instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature must be maintained at
least 4 °F above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product
temperature, as applicable, for at least 1 hour.
(3) After the instantaneous average next-tovend beverage temperature is maintained at
or above 4 °F above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product
temperature, as applicable, for at least 1 hour,
the refrigerated beverage vending machine
must return to the specified integrated
average temperature or lowest application
product temperature, as applicable,
automatically without direct physical
intervention.
(b) Or, the compressor does not cycle on
for the entire 6 hour period, in which case
the instantaneous average beverage
temperature does not have to reach 4 °F
above the integrated average temperature or
lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, but, the equipment must still
automatically return to the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product
temperature, as applicable, after the 6 hour
period without direct physical intervention.
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
45800
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2.3.3. Calculations and Rounding. In all
cases, the primary rated energy consumption
per day (ED) must be calculated with raw
measured values and the final result rounded
to units of 0.01 kWh/day.
3. Determination of Refrigeration Volume,
Vendible Capacity, and Surface Area.
3.1. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the
‘‘refrigerated volume’’ of refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with Appendix C, ‘‘Measurement
of Volume,’’ of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.293).
For combination vending machines, the
‘‘refrigerated volume’’ does not include any
non-refrigerated compartment(s).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
3.2. Vendible Capacity. Determine the
‘‘vendible capacity’’ of refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with the first paragraph of section
5, ‘‘Vending Machine Capacity,’’ of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.293). For combination vending
machines, the ‘‘vendible capacity’’ includes
only the capacity of any portion of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine that is refrigerated and does
not include the capacity of the nonrefrigerated compartment(s).
3.3. Determination of Surface Area. Note:
This section is not required for the
certification of refrigerated bottled or canned
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
beverage vending machines. Determine the
surface area of each beverage vending
machine as the length multiplied by the
height of outermost surface of the beverage
vending machine cabinet, measured from
edge to edge excluding any legs or other
protrusions that extend beyond the
dimensions of the primary cabinet.
Determine the transparent and nontransparent areas on each side of a beverage
vending machine as the total surface area of
material that is transparent or is not
transparent, respectively.
[FR Doc. 2015–17967 Filed 7–30–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
E:\FR\FM\31JYR2.SGM
31JYR2
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45757-45800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17967]
[[Page 45757]]
Vol. 80
Friday,
No. 147
July 31, 2015
Part III
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Refrigerated Bottled or
Canned Beverage Vending Machines; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 80 , No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 45758]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0045]
RIN 1904-AD07
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Refrigerated
Bottled or Canned Beverage Vending Machines
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 11, 2014, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued
a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to amend the test procedure for
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines (beverage
vending machines or BVMs). That proposed rulemaking serves as the basis
for the final rule. In this final rule, DOE is reorganizing its test
procedure for beverage vending machines into an Appendix A, which will
be mandatory for equipment testing beginning 180 days after the final
rule is published in the Federal Register, and an Appendix B, which
will be mandatory for equipment testing to demonstrate compliance with
any amended energy conservation standards arising out of DOE's ongoing
BVM energy conservation standards rulemaking. Specifically, Appendix A
includes amendments that update the referenced test method to ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, eliminate the requirement to test at the
90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition, establish a provision for
testing at the lowest application product temperature, and adopt
several amendments and clarifications to the DOE test procedure to
improve the repeatability and remove ambiguity from the current BVM
test procedure, as established by DOE in the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule. Appendix B contains all the amendments included in Appendix
A and, in addition, incorporates provisions to account for the impact
of low power modes on measured daily energy consumption (DEC). Finally,
DOE is adopting in this final rule several clarifications regarding the
certification and reporting requirements for beverage vending machines.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is August 31, 2015. Compliance
with Appendix A to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 will be mandatory for
representations made on or after January 27, 2016. Compliance with
Appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 will be mandatory for
representations made on or after the compliance date of any amended
energy conservation standards. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022). DOE
will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the
compliance date for Appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule
was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of August 31,
2015.
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 regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in the 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://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx/productid/24. This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this
document on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov 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 Ms.
Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email:
Brenda.Edwards@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:
refrigerated_beverage_vending_machines@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1777, Email: Sarah.Butler@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule incorporates by reference
into 10 CFR part 431 the testing methods contained in the following
commercial standards:
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, ``Methods of Testing for Rating
Vending Machines for Sealed Beverages,'' approved July 23, 2010.
Copies of ASHRAE standards may be purchased from the American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers; 1791
Tullie Circle NE., Atlanta, GA 30329, 404-636-8400, or www.ashrae.org.
See section IV.N. for additional information on this standard.
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Appendix A: Clarifications and Amendments to the DOE Test
Procedure
1. Updating the Referenced Test Method
2. Other Minor Clarifications and Amendments to ASHRAE 32.1-2010
3. Eliminating Testing at the 90 [deg]F Ambient Test Condition
4. Test Procedure for Combination Vending Machines
5. Loading of BVM Models When Conducting the DOE Test Procedure
6. Specifying the Characteristics of the Standard Product
7. Clarifying the Next-To-Vend Beverage Temperature Test
Condition
8. Defining ``Fully Cooled''
9. Placement of Thermocouples During Testing
10. Establishing Testing Provisions at the Lowest Application
Product Temperature
11. Treatment of Certain Accessories During Testing
B. Appendix B: Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions To
Account for Low Power Modes
1. Definitions Related to the Low Power Mode Test Procedure
2. Low Power Mode Test Method
3. Refrigeration Low Power Mode Verification Test Protocol
C. Other Amendments and Clarifications
1. Clarifications to the Scope of the BVM Regulations
2. Clarifications to Certification and Reporting Requirements
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
N. Description of Standards Incorporated by Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
[[Page 45759]]
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
Title III, Part B \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975 (``EPCA'' or ``the Act''), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309,
as codified) established the ``Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products Other Than Automobiles.'' \2\ These include refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machines (``beverage vending
machines'' or BVMs), the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6295(v))
\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
\2\ 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).
\3\ Because Congress included beverage vending machines in Part
A of Title III of EPCA, the consumer product provisions of Part A
(not the industrial equipment provisions of Part A-1) apply to
beverage vending machines. DOE placed the regulatory requirements
specific to beverage vending machines in Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), part 431, ``Energy Efficiency Program for
Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment'' as a matter of
administrative convenience based on their type and will refer to
beverage vending machines as ``equipment'' throughout this document
because of their placement in 10 CFR part 431. Despite the placement
of beverage vending machines in 10 CFR part 431, the relevant
provisions of Title A of EPCA and 10 CFR part 430, which are
applicable to all product types specified in Title A of EPCA, are
applicable to beverage vending machines. See 74 FR 44914, 44917
(Aug. 31, 2009). In this test procedure final rule, DOE is
clarifying the relevant authority for beverage vending machines by
modifying 10 CFR 431.291 to specify that the regulatory provisions
of 10 CFR 430.33 and 430.34 and subparts D and E of 10 CFR part 430
are applicable to beverage vending machines. DOE notes that because
the procedures in Parts 430 and 431 for petitioning DOE for
obtaining a test procedure waiver are substantively the same (79 FR
26591, 26601(May 9, 2014)), the regulations for applying for a test
procedure waiver for beverage vending machines are those found at 10
CFR 431.401 rather than those found at 430.27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Secretary or the Federal Trade Commission, as appropriate, may
prescribe labeling requirements for beverage vending machines. (42
U.S.C. 6294(a)(5)(A)) 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.
EPCA requires the test procedure for beverage vending machines to
be based on ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15)) In
addition, 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)) EPCA also provides that the
Secretary of Energy (Secretary) shall review test procedures for all
covered products at least once every 7 years, and either amend the test
procedures (if the Secretary determines that amended test procedures
would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements of 42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) or publish a determination in the Federal Register
not to amend them. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
In addition, if DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is
warranted, it must publish the 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))
Pursuant to DOE's obligations under EPCA, DOE reviewed the BVM test
procedure at 10 CFR 431.294 and determined that the test procedure
could be amended to improve the accuracy of the test procedure for
beverage vending machines and to incorporate new technology features.
As such, on August 11, 2014, DOE published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) proposing amendments to its test procedure (2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR). 79 FR 46908. These proposed amendments were
presented at the BVM test procedure NOPR public meeting held on
September 16, 2014. DOE received written and verbal comments in
response to the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR at the NOPR public meeting
as well as throughout the comment period. The amendments adopted in
this final rule respond to and reflect upon those comments.
This final rule also fulfills DOE's obligation to periodically
review its test procedures under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A). DOE
anticipates that its next evaluation of this test procedure will occur
in a manner consistent with the timeline set out in this provision.
DOE also reviewed the adopted amendments to determine whether they
would have an impact on the measured energy consumption of covered
beverage vending machines. DOE has determined that the test procedure
amendments incorporating provisions to account for low power modes will
change the measured energy use of beverage vending machines when
compared to the current BVM test procedure, as established by DOE in
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule (subsequent references to DOE's
``current test procedure'' for beverage vending machines in this
document refer to the test procedure established by DOE in the 2006 BVM
test procedure final rule as it existed at 10 CFR 431.294 in the
edition of 10 CFR parts 200 to 499 revised as of January 1, 2015).
Therefore, DOE is considering the impacts of these changes as part of
its standards rulemaking for beverage vending machines (``BVM energy
conservation standards rulemaking,'' Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022)
and will not require use of these test procedure provisions (contained
in Appendix B) until the compliance date of any amended standards set
as a result of that rulemaking.
B. Background
EPCA requires the test procedure for beverage vending machines to
be based on American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE) Standard 32.1-2004 (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004), ``Methods
of Testing for Rating Vending Machines for Bottled, Canned or Other
Sealed Beverages.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15)) In December 2006, DOE
published a final rule establishing a test procedure for beverage
vending machines, among other products and equipment (the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule). 71 FR 71340, 71355 (Dec. 8, 2006). In that final
rule, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(15), DOE adopted ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2004 as the DOE test procedure, except that DOE modified
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 to require parties to test equipment
with dual nameplate voltages at the lower of the two voltages only. 71
FR at 71355.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 specifies a method for determining
the capacity of vending machines, referred to as ``vendible capacity,''
which is
[[Page 45760]]
essentially the maximum number of standard sealed beverages a vending
machine can hold for sale. In the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule,
however, DOE adopted the ``refrigerated volume'' measure in section
5.2, ``Refrigerated Volume Calculation,'' of ANSI/Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) HRF-1-2004 (ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004) in
addition to the ``vendible capacity'' measure, as referred to in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004. 71 FR at 71355. DOE adopted ``refrigerated
volume'' as the primary measure of capacity for beverage vending
machines because of the variety of dispensing mechanisms and storage
arrangements among similar machines that may lead to potentially
different refrigerated volumes for different machines with the same
vendible capacity. In addition, EPCA has historically used upper limits
on energy use as a function of volume for the purposes of establishing
energy conservation standards for refrigeration equipment. Id.
In the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, DOE determined that
section 5.2 of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, which addresses the measurement of
refrigerated volume in household freezers, is also applicable to
beverage vending machines and is more appropriate than the language for
measurement of volume in household refrigerators of section 4.2 of
ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004. Specifically, section 5.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2004 includes provisions for specific compartments and features
that are typically found in beverage vending machines, which are
similar to compartments and features found in freezers. Therefore, DOE
adopted ``refrigerated volume'' in lieu of ``vendible capacity'' as the
dimensional metric for beverage vending machines in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule. Id.
Since the publication of the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule,
ASHRAE and AHAM have both published updated test standards. The most
recent edition of the ASHRAE 32.1 test method is ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2010, which includes changes that align ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 with the nomenclature and methodology used in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule (71 FR at 71355) and the 2009 BVM energy
conservation standards final rule (74 FR 44914 (Aug. 31, 2009)). The
most recent version of the AHAM HRF-1 test standard, AHAM HRF-1-2008,
changes and reorganizes some sections for simplicity and usability,
including the section relevant to measuring refrigerated volume of
beverage vending machines.
DOE reviewed these updated industry standards and proposed in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR to, among other things, incorporate by
reference ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, with minor modifications, as the DOE
test procedure for beverage vending machines, for both determining
daily energy consumption (DEC) and refrigerated volume. Specifically,
DOE proposed to adopt Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 for
determining refrigerated volume and proposed to remove ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-
2004 from the documents incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 431.293. 79
FR 46908, 46911-46912 (Aug. 11, 2014). In addition to updating the BVM
test procedure to incorporate by reference the latest industry
standards, DOE also proposed a number of other amendments to clarify
DOE's BVM regulations, remove ambiguity from the BVM test procedure,
and adopt provisions to account for low power modes in the measured
DEC. 79 FR 46908.
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
This final rule amends the DOE test procedure for beverage vending
machines to clarify and remove ambiguity from the procedure, as well as
incorporate several amendments that account for updated industry test
methods and new equipment features. This final rule also reorganizes
the DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines into an Appendix A
to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431, which will be mandatory for
representations made starting 180 days after the final rule is
published in the Federal Register, and an Appendix B, that will be
mandatory for equipment testing to demonstrate compliance with any
amended energy conservation standards adopted as a result of the BVM
energy conservation standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-
0022)
Appendix A includes amendments that (1) update the referenced test
method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, (2) incorporate amendments to
clarify several ambiguities in the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, (3)
eliminate the requirement to test at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test
condition, (4) clarify the test procedure for combination vending
machines, (5) clarify the requirements for loading of BVM units under
the DOE test procedure, (6) specify the characteristics of a standard
test package, (7) clarify the average next-to-vend beverage temperature
test condition, (8) specify placement of thermocouples during the DOE
test procedure, (9) establish provisions for testing at the lowest
application product temperature, (10) clarify the treatment of certain
accessories during the DOE test procedure, and (11) clarify the
certification and reporting requirements for covered beverage vending
machines. DOE has concluded that these amendments will serve to clarify
the test procedure. As such, and as noted above, these clarifications
and amendments are mandatory for representations made starting 180 days
after the final rule is published in the Federal Register, and
manufacturers will be required to use Appendix A to demonstrate
compliance with existing energy conservation standards for beverage
vending machines after that date. If desired, manufacturers may elect
to begin using Appendix A on the effective date of this final rule, 30
days after publication in the Federal Register, instead of the existing
BVM test procedure requirements in 10 CFR 431.294 as it appeared in the
10 CFR parts 200 to 499 edition revised as of January 1, 2015.
Appendix B includes all provisions of Appendix A, as well as
provisions to account for the impact of low power modes on the measured
DEC of beverage vending machines. Appendix B is intended to be used to
demonstrate compliance with any amended energy conservation standards
for beverage vending machines established as part of the parallel BVM
energy conservation standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-
0022) Manufacturers will be required to use the test procedure adopted
in Appendix B to demonstrate compliance with any future DOE energy
conservation standards for beverage vending machines, as well as for
labeling or other representations as to the energy use of refrigerated
beverage vending machines, beginning on the compliance date of any
final rule establishing amended energy conservation standards for
beverage vending machines.
Prior to the compliance date of any such amended energy
conservation standards, manufacturers must continue to use the test
procedure found in Appendix A to demonstrate compliance with existing
DOE energy conservation standards and for representations concerning
the energy use of refrigerated beverage vending machines. However,
manufacturers may elect to use the amended test procedure in Appendix B
established as a result of this rulemaking to demonstrate compliance
with any future, amended standards prior to the compliance date of such
standards. Manufacturers who choose to use the amended test procedure
in Appendix B early must
[[Page 45761]]
ensure that their equipment satisfies any applicable amended energy
conservation standards established as a result of the BVM energy
conservation standards rulemaking. In other words, a manufacturer may
elect to use the test procedure in Appendix B prior to the established
compliance date of any amended energy conservation standards to make
representations with respect to the energy use of a basic model only if
it also elects to certify compliance with the amended energy
conservation standards.
Finally, DOE is amending 10 CFR 429.52(b) with regard to reporting
requirements for beverage vending machines, including a clarifying
amendment that the reported energy consumption value for beverage
vending machines is based on the DEC measured in accordance with the
test procedure. Similarly, DOE is amending the introductory language
found in 10 CFR 431.296 to clarify the applicability of the DEC to the
energy conservation standards listed in that section.
III. Discussion
In this BVM final rule, DOE is adopting several amendments to
subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431 to (1) clarify the scope of DOE's BVM
regulations, (2) incorporate several new definitions relevant to
testing beverage vending machines, (3) update the industry test methods
incorporated by reference into the DOE test procedure, (4) update and
clarify DOE's test procedure for beverage vending machines, and (5)
clarify the language describing the energy conservation standards for
beverage vending machines for the purposes of reporting the DEC
determined in accordance with the test procedure. DOE is also
clarifying how the DEC measured in accordance with the test procedure
is reported to DOE in accordance with 10 CFR 429.52(b). The amendments
adopted in this final rule are summarized in Table III.1 and discussed
in more detail in the subsequent sections of this final rule, as noted
in the table.
Table III.1--Summary of Amendments Adopted in this Final Rule, Their Location Within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), and the Applicable Preamble Discussion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable preamble
CFR location Topic Summary of amendments discussion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR 429.52(b)................... Reporting Requirements Amend reporting Section III.C.2.
requirements to reflect
amendments incorporated in
Appendices A and B.
10 CFR 431.291..................... Scope................. Clarify applicability of 10 Section III.C.1.
CFR 430.33 and 430.34 and
subparts D and E of 10 CFR
part 430 to beverage
vending machines.
10 CFR 431.292..................... Definitions........... Incorporate new definitions Section III.A.7 and
pertinent to testing III.A.10.
beverage vending machines.
10 CFR 431.293..................... Incorporation by Update industry standards Section III.A.1.
Reference. incorporated by reference
in the DOE test procedure
to reflect the latest
versions.
10 CFR 431.294..................... Test Procedure........ Reorganize BVM test N/A.
procedure into Appendices
A and B (see below).
Appendix A to Subpart Q of Part 431 Test Procedure Incorporate several minor Section III.A.
Applicable to Energy amendments and
Conservation clarifications to improve
Standards for which the accuracy and remove
Compliance was ambiguity.
Required as of August
31, 2012.
Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 431 Test Procedure Incorporate amendments Section III.B.
Applicable to Amended included in Appendix A and
Energy Conservation provisions for measuring
Standards Being low power modes.
Considered in a
Related Rulemaking.
10 CFR 431.466..................... Energy Conservation Clarify the applicability Section III.C.2.
Standards. of the DEC measured in
accordance with the test
procedure to the energy
conservation standards
listed in this section.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The amendments discussed in the subsequent sections and adopted in
this final rule also respond to and reflect comments by interested
parties in response to the proposed amendments presented in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR. 79 FR 46908 (Aug. 11, 2014).
A. Appendix A: Clarifications and Amendments to the DOE Test Procedure
In order to clarify and remove ambiguity from the test procedure
for beverage vending machines, DOE is amending subpart Q of 10 CFR part
431 by moving most of the existing test procedure for beverage vending
machines from 10 CFR 431.294 to a new Appendix A to subpart Q of 10 CFR
part 431. In Appendix A, DOE is also incorporating amendments to
clarify and update the current DOE test procedure for beverage vending
machines in the following ways:
(1) Updating the referenced test method to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2010,
(2) incorporating several additional amendments to clarify
ambiguities in the ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 test method,
(3) eliminating testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test
condition,
(4) clarifying the test procedure for combination vending machines,
(5) clarifying the requirements for loading BVM models under the
DOE test procedure,
(6) clarifying the specifications of the standard product,
(7) clarifying the next-to-vend beverage temperature test
condition,
(8) specifying placement of thermocouples during the DOE test
procedure,
(9) establishing testing provisions at the lowest application
product temperature, and
(10) clarifying the treatment of certain accessories when
conducting the DOE test procedure.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also proposed a new
[[Page 45762]]
definition and optional test method for ``fully cooled.'' 79 FR 46908,
46915-17 (Aug. 11, 2014). DOE discusses this issue in section III.A.8
of this final rule. However, due to the complexity and scope of the
comments received on this issue, DOE is electing to address the
differentiation of Class A and Class B equipment, including the
definition of fully cooled, in the ongoing BVM energy conservation
standard rulemaking instead of this test procedure final rule. (Docket
No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022).
The subsequent sections III.A.1 through III.A.11 of this final rule
discuss the specific test procedure provisions that required
clarification, any comments received on these topics in response to the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE's response to those comments, and any
final amendments DOE is adopting in this final rule.
1. Updating the Referenced Test Method
The current DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines
incorporates by reference two industry test procedures, ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2004 and ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, which establish a test
method for beverage vending machines and a method for determining
refrigerated volume, respectively. Each of these industry test
procedures has been updated since the publication of the DOE test
procedure in 2006. The most current versions are ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2010 and AHAM HRF-1-2008.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 was amended from the 2004 version to
include new definitions and nomenclature established by DOE in the 2009
BVM final rule. These changes include removing references to specific
sealed-bottle package designs such as ``bottled'' or ``canned,''
revising the scope, and incorporating a new Appendix C, ``Measurement
of Volume,'' which consists of certain portions of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004
for measuring the refrigerated volume. Specifically, ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2004 incorporated the portions of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004
currently referenced in the DOE test procedure, section 5.2 (excluding
subsections 5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4), which describes the method for
determining refrigerated volume for residential freezers, as well as
section 5.1, which describes the purpose of the section. These new
amendments make the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 test procedure
identical to the DOE test procedure established in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule. As the amendments to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 are primarily editorial, they do not affect the tested DEC. In the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to update the industry test
method incorporated by reference to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 for
the measurement of DEC and vendible capacity. 79 FR 46908, 46911-46912
(Aug. 11, 2014).
Since DOE published the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, AHAM
has released a new version of the AHAM HRF-1 test method, which
reorganizes and simplifies the test method as presented in ANSI/AHAM
HRF-1-2004. The revised AHAM HRF-1 test method, ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2008,
combines sections 4, 5, and 6, which relate to measuring the
refrigerated volume of refrigerators and freezers, into one section
describing methods for determining the refrigerated volume of
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, wine chillers, and freezers. This
unified and simplified method includes several changes regarding the
inclusion or exclusion of certain special features from the
determination of refrigerated volume, such that DOE believes AHAM HRF-
1-2008 has the potential to yield refrigerated volume values that
differ slightly from those measured and calculated using the method in
the current DOE test procedure. As such, in the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to adopt Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 as the volume measurement methodology in its amended BVM test
procedure. In the NOPR, DOE stated that adopting Appendix C of ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 would simplify testing for manufacturers
because it would allow them to reference a single document containing
all information needed to conduct the DOE test procedure. DOE also
stated that it did not believe that the updated AHAM HRF-1-2008 test
procedure has sufficient additional merit, compared to the volume
calculation method included in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, to
justify the additional burden on manufacturers. 79 FR at 46912.
Commensurate with this proposal, DOE also proposed to remove ANSI/AHAM
HRF-1-2004 from the documents incorporated by reference in 10 CFR
431.293. Id.
In response to these proposals, DOE received several comments from
interested parties regarding which industry test methods DOE should
incorporate by reference and the impacts of updating the industry test
methods incorporated by reference in the DOE test procedure. Automated
Merchandising Systems, Inc. (AMS), Sanden Vendo America Inc. (SVA), and
Coca-Cola generally supported DOE's proposal to update its test
procedure reference to ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 1;
\4\ SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2). Coca-Cola and
ASHRAE's Standard Project Committee (SPC) 32.1 recommended that DOE
wait for ASHRAE 32.1 revisions before adopting a new version of 32.1.
The California investor-owned utilities (CA IOUs), including Pacific
Gas & Electric, Southern California Gas Company, Southern California
Edison, and San Diego Gas and Electric, commented that DOE should align
new test procedure development with ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 and track the
efforts of the ASHRAE Standard Project Committee 32.1 (ASHRAE SPC 32.1)
to incorporate changes into Appendix B before publication of the final
rule (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 2; ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1-2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A notation in this form provides a reference for information
that is in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop test procedures
for beverage vending machines (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0045,
which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). This particular
notation refers to a comment: (1) submitted by Automated
Merchandising Systems, Inc. (AMS); (2) appearing in document number
0007 of the docket; and (3) appearing on page 1 of that document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE appreciates comments from interested parties and agrees that
alignment with the most recent version of the industry test method,
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, is advisable and will make testing beverage vending
machines more consistent with the latest industry methods. DOE is aware
that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 was convened in January 2014 and has been meeting
monthly to discuss potential updates to the ASHRAE 32.1 standard.\5\
DOE has been participating in these meetings to stay abreast of the
changes ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering. To the extent possible, DOE has
sought to align this final rule with those discussions and proposed
updates. However, DOE notes that the discussions of the committee are
not final until such amendments are approved as a new version of the
ASHRAE 32.1 standard. At this time, DOE is not aware of ASHRAE's
specific timeline for making such an updated version available. DOE
also notes that DOE must also consider its obligations under 42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(1)(A) to review test procedures every 7 years, as well as the
relationship between the BVM test
[[Page 45763]]
procedure rulemaking and the ongoing BVM energy conservation standards
rulemaking, when determining timelines. As such, DOE is compelled to
move forward with finalizing the BVM test procedure amendments, as
presented in this final rule, to satisfy its EPCA requirements and not
adversely impact the BVM energy conservation standards rulemaking
schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The meeting minutes for ASHRAE SPC 32.1 are available at:
https://spc321.ashraepcs.org/. DOE notes that, as of April 10, 2015,
the Web site was last updated June 10, 2014 and, as such, only
meeting minutes through May 2014 were available, although the
committee has continued to meet since that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding DOE's proposal to update the test method for determining
refrigerated volume, Coca-Cola expressed support for the method
described in HRF-1-2008 for determining refrigerated volume but
emphasized that measurements resulting from these proposed
clarifications would render different results than existing procedure,
as opposed to DOE's proposed adoption of Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1-2010. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and AMS
objected to DOE's proposal to update the referenced method of test for
the measurement of refrigerated volume in its test procedure from
section 5 of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004 to Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-
2010. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1-2; AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 1-2)
In particular, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that they are considering
updating Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 to reference section 4 of
AHAM HRF-1-2008 to simplify the refrigerated volume measurement process
that would result in minimal differences in the measurement of
refrigerated volume. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 1-2) AMS
commented that the new calculations would affect the Maximum Daily
Energy Consumption (MDEC) of their machines. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 1-2)
In response to comments regarding the proposed test method for
determining refrigerated volume, DOE analyzed ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004,
AHAM HRF-1-2008, and Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 and compared
the relevant methods. DOE believes AHAM HRF-1-2008 has the potential to
yield refrigerated volume values that differ slightly from those
calculated using ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, which was the method
incorporated by reference in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, as
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 acknowledged during the NOPR public meeting. DOE does
not believe that the updated method for computing refrigerated volume
from section 4 of the AHAM HRF-1-2008 test method has sufficient
additional merit when compared to the volume calculation method
included in Appendix C of the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, which
adopts section 5.2 (excluding subsections 5.2.2.2 through 5.2.2.4) of
ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004. Therefore, DOE is adopting provisions to continue
referencing ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, as incorporated into Appendix C of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010.
In addition, adopting Appendix C of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010
will allow manufacturers to reference a single industry standard
containing all information needed to conduct the DOE test procedure for
beverage vending machines and will also limit manufacturer testing
burden since they will only have to purchase one industry standard to
complete the DOE test procedure. For these reasons, DOE is updating the
industry test method incorporated by reference to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2010 for the measurement of refrigerated volume and removing the
incorporation by reference of ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004 from the DOE test
procedure. Accordingly, DOE is also amending the definition for
refrigerated volume at Sec. 431.292 to reference the appropriate
standard.
2. Other Minor Clarifications and Amendments to ASHRAE 32.1-2010
In reviewing ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, and in light of the comments
received from interested parties suggesting that DOE follow the work of
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 to update the ASHRAE 32.1 test method, DOE is adopting
several additional clarifications in this final rule. Specifically, DOE
is clarifying: (1) The ambient temperature and relative humidity
tolerances, (2) the voltage tolerances for equipment with dual
nameplate voltages, (3) the requirements for sampling and recording of
specific test data, and (4) how to calculate DEC based on tested values
determined in the ASHRAE 32.1 test method.
DOE is incorporating these amendments in response to comments that
DOE should align updates to the DOE test procedure for beverage vending
machines with the updates being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1. DOE has
determined that these amendments will improve the clarity and
repeatability of the DOE test procedure and is incorporating these
amendments in Appendices A and B of the BVM test procedure.
a. Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Tolerance
In written comments, AMS suggested that DOE clarify permissible
temperature limits during testing (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3). DOE
appreciates the comment, and wishes to clarify that ambient temperature
and humidity shall be maintained within the ranges specified in Table
1, ``Standard Test Conditions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 for each
recorded measurement for the duration of the test, including
stabilization. The ambient temperature and relative humidity
requirements from Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 that are pertinent
to the DOE test procedure are shown in Table III.2. To clarify that the
tolerance on relative humidity is in fact in the units of ``percent
relative humidity (percent RH)'' and not a percentage of the measured
value, the acceptable range is also provided in Table III.2.
Table III.2--Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Specified Value and Tolerance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test and pretest condition Value Tolerance Acceptable range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambient Temperature.................. 75 [deg]F.............. 2 [deg]F... 73-77 [deg]F
Relative Humidity.................... 45 percent RH.......... 5 percent 40-50 percent RH
RH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this final rule, DOE is adopting a similar table in section 2.1
of Appendix A and B to clearly specify the appropriate test conditions
and applicable tolerances for, among other things, the ambient
temperature and relative humidity.
DOE's amendments specifying the ambient temperature and relative
humidity tolerances in Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 as an
instantaneous tolerance to be applied to each measurement are
consistent with the updates ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering in their
revisions of the ASHRAE 32.1 standard. In addition, such treatment is
consistent with the specification of ambient conditions in the DOE test
procedure for similar equipment, including commercial refrigeration
equipment (10 CFR 431.64) and automatic commercial ice makers (10 CFR
431.134). DOE also notes,
[[Page 45764]]
however, that such treatment is different than the tolerance applied to
the integrated average temperature (as described in section III.A.7 of
this final rule), which is a single tolerance applied to that one
average value and is not applicable to each temperature measurement in
that case.
In addition, when reviewing the ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 test method
in conjunction with ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE determined that the accuracy
requirements for the equipment used to measure relative humidity are
not clearly specified. As the relative humidity is required to be
maintained within 5 percent RH of the specified value, the
precision of the measurement equipment must be of higher resolution
than the allowed tolerance in order to ensure that the relative
humidity is in fact maintained within such a range. As such, and in
accordance with the changes being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE is
adopting provisions in section 1.1 of Appendices A and B that relative
humidity shall be measured with a calibrated instrument accurate to
2 percent RH at the ambient conditions specified in Table 1
of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010. That is, the instrument must have a measured
accuracy of 2 percent RH at 45 percent RH, or 4.4 percent
of the measured value.
b. Voltage and Frequency Tolerances
Following publication of the NOPR, DOE learned that ASHRAE SPC 32.1
was considering changes to ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 concerning BVM
nameplate voltages. Specifically, DOE became aware that ASHRAE SPC 32.1
was considering a change such that the same tolerances on nameplate
voltage and frequency that apply to equipment with single nameplate
voltages, namely 2 percent and 1 percent,
respectively, should also apply to the tested voltage for equipment
with dual nameplate voltages. Consistent with the changes being
considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE determined that the tolerances on
voltage and frequency listed in paragraph (a) of section 6.2, ``Voltage
and Frequency,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 (which addresses beverage
vending machines with single nameplate voltages) are not equivalently
applied to equipment with dual nameplate voltages in paragraph (b) of
section 6.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010. As such, DOE is adopting, in this
final rule, provisions in section 2.1 of Appendices A and B that
beverage vending machines with dual nameplate voltages must be
conducted at the lower of the two voltages 2 percent and at
the rated frequency 1 percent.
c. Data Collection
In section 7.2.2.3, ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 currently specifies that
the following data shall be recorded for 24 consecutive hours after
stabilization has been achieved: Ambient temperature, relative
humidity, average beverage temperature, energy consumption, input
voltage, and time. However, ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 does not provide
specific requirements regarding how frequently such data should be
sampled.
In response to the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, AMS recommended
that DOE clearly state at what interval each reading is taken, and
suggested that readings should be recorded at a minimum frequency of
once per minute. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3)
DOE agrees with AMS that the sampling interval for data collection
should be clearly specified, as collecting data at different sampling
intervals can affect the energy consumption results. As such, DOE is
clarifying in section 2.2.4 of Appendix A and 2.2.6 of Appendix B that
the sampling interval must be at least 1 minute; that is, each measured
data variable should be recorded at least every 1 minute. DOE notes
that this requirement is also consistent with the changes being
considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1 for future revisions of the ASHRAE 32.1
standard.
In addition, DOE notes that, as part of this final rule, DOE is
also adopting amendments to the BVM test procedure that change the
terms that are used to refer to the ``average beverage temperature,''
as described more fully in section III.A.7 and III.B.3 of this final
rule. Specifically, instead of the ``average beverage temperature,'' as
referenced in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, DOE's test procedure for beverage
vending machines as adopted in this final rule refers to the
``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature'' and the
``integrated average temperature.'' As such, DOE is clarifying in
section 2.2.4 of Appendix A and 2.2.6 of Appendix B that, in section
7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, the ``average beverage temperature''
refers to the ``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage
temperature.''
d. Calculation of Daily Energy Consumption.
Section 7.2.3, ``Energy Consumption Calculations,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1-2010 specifies that the daily rated energy consumption of each
basic model of a vending machine shall be determined as:
ED = (ET/tT) x 24
Where:
ED = primary rated energy consumption per day, kWh,
ET = energy consumed during the test, kWh,
tT = duration of the test, h, and
24 = the number of hours per day.
In reviewing ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010, DOE realized that there may be
confusion regarding the terminology used in this section and how these
values are to be used when determining the DEC result for a given
tested unit for the purposes of rating equipment in accordance with the
DOE test procedure. Specifically, the variable ED is
referred to as both the ``daily rated energy consumption'' in the
introductory paragraph and the ``primary rated energy consumption per
day'' in the variable definitions below the stated equation In section
2.3 of Appendices A and B, DOE is referring to the variable
ED using only the term ``primary rated energy consumption
per day'' to describe how to use this value when determining the DEC of
each tested beverage vending machine.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ DOE notes that additional calculations may be required to
determine the ``daily energy consumption'' in accordance with the
DOE BVM test procedure adopted in this final rule to address payment
mechanisms, depending on the configuration in which the beverage
vending machine is tested. See section III.A.11.a for more
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE also notes that ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 currently does not
specify how to treat measured values when calculating the DEC values in
accordance with section 7.2.3, ``Energy Consumption Calculations,'' of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010. In this final rule, DOE is also adopting
specifications in section 2.3.1 of Appendix A and 2.3.3 of Appendix B
that the primary rated energy consumption per day (ED) must
be calculated with raw measured values and rounded to units of 0.01
kWh/day.
3. Eliminating Testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F Ambient Test Condition
Both ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the test method incorporated
by reference in the DOE test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule, and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, the test
method DOE is incorporating by reference in the amended test procedure
as discussed in section III.A.1 of this final rule, specify two tests:
One at an ambient condition of 75[emsp14][deg]F
2[emsp14][deg]F and 45 percent 5 percent relative humidity
(``the 75[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition'') and the other at an
ambient condition of 90[emsp14][deg]F 2[emsp14][deg]F and
65 percent 5 percent relative humidity (``the
90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition''). By incorporating by
reference ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
[[Page 45765]]
32.1-2004, DOE's current test procedure for beverage vending machines
requires testing at both the 75[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition
and 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition. In the energy conservation
standards rulemaking that culminated in the 2009 BVM final rule,
however, DOE decided that only the measured DEC determined at the
75[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition would be used for the purposes
of demonstrating compliance with applicable energy conservation
standards. The data taken at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test
condition were not used by DOE in setting the standards established in
the 2009 BVM final rule and are not used to demonstrate compliance with
those standards. 74 FR 44914, 44920 (Aug. 31, 2009) and 10 CFR 429.52.
However, the 2009 BVM final rule did not similarly amend the DOE test
procedure to remove the requirement to test at the 90[emsp14][deg]F
ambient test condition and, as such, the requirement to test covered
BVM models at both the 75[emsp14][deg]F and 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient
test conditions established in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule
remained in place until being reevaluated in this test procedure
rulemaking.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to amend its test
procedure to eliminate the requirement to perform a test at the
90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition as described in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2004 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010. 79 FR 46908,
46912-46913 (Aug. 11, 2014). DOE understands that the 90[emsp14][deg]F
test is used primarily to represent and evaluate the performance of
some units that may be installed outdoors, especially in hot-humid
locations; however, as mentioned above, the performance of a beverage
vending machine at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition is not
currently used for DOE regulatory purposes. Therefore, DOE does not see
a need to maintain the 90[emsp14][deg]F test condition as part of the
DOE test procedure.
DOE believes that removing the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test
condition test requirement will also reduce manufacturer burden
associated with its test procedure by eliminating testing that does not
significantly increase the accuracy or representativeness of the DOE
test procedure and is unnecessary for demonstrating compliance with
DOE's energy conservation standards.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comment on its
proposal to eliminate the requirement to conduct testing at the 90
[deg]F ambient test condition. 79 FR at 46913. AMS, SVA, and ASHRAE SPC
32.1 supported the elimination of testing at the 90 [deg]F test
condition. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 2; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2) Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) asked why DOE
would not test their machines according to worst case conditions.
(NRCan, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 25) Coca-Cola also
agreed with DOE that there should be a single set of conditions for
testing and rating purposes. Coca-Cola, however, stated that some
machines are designed for higher ambient temperatures, and asked DOE to
factor this into the application of test results, even if the machine
is not tested at 90 [deg]F. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 2)
DOE appreciates the comments from AMS, SVA, and ASHRAE SPC 32.1
supporting the elimination of the 90 [deg]F ambient test condition and
Coca-Cola's comment to have a single set of conditions for testing and
rating purposes. In response to the comment from NRCan, DOE notes that
it is required to create test procedures that are representative of the
performance of the equipment under an average cycle of use. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3)) DOE believes that the test conditions required by the test
procedure, namely 75 [deg]F and 45 percent relative humidity, are
reasonably representative of the average operating conditions of most
beverage vending machines. In particular, DOE notes that the majority
of beverage vending machines are installed indoors (see chapter 7 of
the BVM energy conservation standard preliminary analysis technical
support document; Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022) and that such
indoor environments are normally kept close to the average temperature
used for the DOE test. As such, DOE believes that the DEC values
measured at the current test conditions are an accurate reflection of
field energy use and does not believe a test condition of 90 [deg]F
would be representative of field energy use for the majority of
equipment. In response to Coca-Cola's comment regarding the application
of test results on machines designed for higher ambient temperatures,
DOE understands that some beverage vending machines are placed in
locations that experience ambient temperature and relative humidity
conditions that differ from those required in the test procedure,
including environments that are often warmer and have higher relative
humidity than specified by ASHRAE 32.1-2010. However, it is not
feasible or realistic to test BVM models at all the different ambient
temperature conditions they may experience in the field. First, doing
so would be extremely burdensome. Second, it is difficult to determine
which BVM models will be placed in different ambient conditions (e.g.,
tropical conditions), as often the same BVM model may be placed indoors
or outdoors. In the BVM energy conservation standards preliminary
analysis, DOE estimated that 18 percent of Class B and Combination B
\7\ beverage vending machines were located outdoors, and all Class A
and Combination A \7\ equipment is located indoors (see chapter 7 of
the BVM energy conservation standard preliminary analysis technical
support document (TSD)). DOE believes that the required test condition
of 75 [deg]F is representative of the indoor environments in which the
majority of BVM units are placed. Therefore, DOE believes the 75 [deg]F
ambient test condition provides a reasonable and comparable
representation of energy performance for all BVM models and testing at
alternative test conditions is not necessary. DOE is accounting for the
variable energy performance of beverage vending machines that are
placed outdoors as part of the energy use analysis associated with the
BVM energy conservation standard rulemaking. However, DOE is not
considering different or alternative energy conservation standards for
such equipment based on the fact that most BVM models can be placed
indoors or outdoors and that, as a result, a standard based on analysis
at the 75 [deg]F test procedure ambient condition would be applicable.
(See Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022 for more information.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In the DOE energy conservation standard preliminary
analysis, DOE discussed dividing the ``combination vending machine''
equipment class into ``Combination A'' equipment that was fully
cooled and ``Combination B'' equipment that was not fully cooled,
similar to the Class A and Class B distinction. See chapter 2 of the
BVM energy conservation standard preliminary analysis TSD.
Additionally, DOE is proposing language to address equipment class
distinctions as part of the energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, in this final rule, DOE is removing the requirement to
conduct testing at the 90 [deg]F ambient test condition as part of the
DOE test procedure. DOE is clarifying the ambient test conditions
necessary for testing in accordance with the DOE test procedure in a
new Table A.1 in Appendix A and Table B.1 in Appendix B in section 2.1
of both Appendices A and B. DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is also
currently considering updating ASHRAE 32.1 to remove the 90 [deg]F
ambient test condition.
4. Test Procedure for Combination Vending Machines
``Combination vending machine'' is currently defined as a
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that also has
non-refrigerated
[[Page 45766]]
volumes for the purpose of vending other, non-``sealed beverage''
merchandise. 10 CFR 431.292. Based on this definition, any machine (a)
that upon payment dispenses beverages in sealed containers and (b) in
which the entire internal storage volume is refrigerated is not a
combination vending machine.
In the 2009 BVM final rule, DOE elected to define ``combination
vending machine,'' but refrained from setting standards for combination
vending machines due to a lack of data regarding their energy
performance. Id. However, DOE is currently considering standards for
combination vending machines in a parallel energy conservation
standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022)
While combination vending machines are not currently required to
comply with energy conservation standards, any representations with
regard to the DEC of such equipment must still be made in accordance
with the DOE BVM test procedure. DOE's current test procedure is
appropriate for the evaluation of the refrigerated volume, vendible
capacity, and energy use of combination vending machines. DOE notes,
however, that the application of the BVM test procedure may require
clarification as to how it is applied to combination vending machines.
Accordingly, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to
clarify the test procedure for combination vending machines. 79 FR
46908, 46913-46914 (Aug. 11, 2014). In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed that only the refrigerated compartment would be
considered in the refrigerated volume calculation, while both
refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments would be considered in
the vendible capacity calculation. Similarly, DOE proposed that
standard test packages be placed in the next-to-vend product location
only in the refrigerated portion of the refrigerated beverage vending
machine, and only the refrigerated portion of the combination vending
machine be required to be fully loaded to capacity. 79 FR at 46914.
With regard to the measurement of DEC for combination vending
machines, DOE also proposed that any lighting or other energy-consuming
features in the non-refrigerated compartment be fully energized during
the test procedure and operated in the same manner as any lighting or
features in the refrigerated compartment. DOE also proposed that the
total energy use of the machine measured during the 24-hour test would
comprise the DEC, as measured in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2010. Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed the addition of
these clarifications to the DOE test procedure at 10 CFR 431.294 for
combination vending machines and requested comment on the applicability
of the existing test procedure, as clarified, to combination vending
machines. In response, SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 commented that they
believe the test procedure is applicable to combination vending
machines. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 2)
Coca-Cola commented that the test was applicable to combination vending
machines that have more than half of the machine capacity refrigerated.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3) AMS noted that the test procedure does
not specify how or what products would be required to be loaded in the
non-refrigerated product compartment during the test, and stated this
could affect the energy consumption of combination vending machines
that do not provide 100 percent thermal isolation between zones. (AMS,
No. 0007 at p. 2) AMS commented that the insulation between
refrigerated and non-refrigerated zones does not completely separate
the two zones and hence should not be excluded from the MDEC
calculation. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 4)
DOE appreciates the comments from SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1
confirming DOE's position that the DOE test procedure is applicable to
combination vending machines. However, DOE disagrees with Coca-Cola's
comment that they believe the test is only applicable to combination
vending machines that have more than half of the machine capacity
refrigerated. The DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines is
applicable to all equipment that meets the definition of a
``refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine,'' as defined
at 10 CFR 431.292, including Class A, Class B, and combination vending
machines. As noted above, DOE currently defines ``combination vending
machine'' as a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine
that also has non-refrigerated volumes for the purpose of vending
other, non-``sealed beverage'' merchandise. 10 CFR 431.292. DOE notes
that its regulations do not restrict the applicability of the
definition based on the relative volumes of the refrigerated and non-
refrigerated volumes. As stated previously, any equipment that is
capable of vending bottled or canned beverages upon payment from a
refrigerated compartment contained within the unit, and also has non-
refrigerated compartments for the purpose of vending other, non-
``sealed beverage'' merchandise, meets the definition of a combination
vending machine regardless of the relative volume of the refrigerated
and non-refrigerated compartments.
In considering the applicability of the combination vending machine
definition, DOE wishes to clarify that combination vending machines
must include compartments that are physically separated. However, DOE
acknowledges that some combination equipment designs employ a common
product delivery chute between the refrigerated and non-refrigerated
compartments. As such, DOE also wishes to clarify that such physically
separate compartments in a combination vending machine may or may not
share a common product delivery chute for the purposes of delivering
vendible merchandise to the customer. To permit additional
consideration of these issues and to provide more opportunity for
comment, DOE will further address the definition of combination vending
machine in the standards rulemaking (Docket EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022). DOE
notes that any changes to the definition adopted in the standards
rulemaking would be to provide more clarity of the distinctions between
the various product classes and would not change the appropriate
classifications.
With regard to the determination of refrigerated volume and
vendible capacity for combination vending machines, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is
also considering specifying that both the refrigerated volume and
vendible capacity measurements refer only to the deliberately
refrigerated compartment(s). In consideration of these changes
suggested by ASHRAE SPC 32.1, DOE is also adopting wording changes in
Appendices A and B to help clarify testing of refrigerated and non-
refrigerated compartments. Section 3.2 of each appendix specifies that
the vendible capacity to be measured includes only the capacity of the
refrigerated compartment; this is a change from DOE's proposed approach
in the BVM test procedure NOPR, where DOE had proposed to include the
entire volume from which the product may be vended, whether or not that
volume is refrigerated. In this final rule, DOE is also clarifying in
section 3.1 of each appendix that the refrigerated volume measurement
only includes the refrigerated compartment, and, in section 2.2.1.3 of
each appendix, that only this compartment shall be fully loaded to
capacity with standard product and test packages. These clarifications
are consistent with the
[[Page 45767]]
changes being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1 to the ASHRAE 32.1
standard. DOE will continue to consider how to delineate more clearly
the distinction between refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments
as it addresses the definition of combination vending machine in the
standards rulemaking (Docket EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022). Because the goal
is to ensure the regulatory text is clear and consistent between the
test procedure, the definitions and the standards, DOE may make, as
part of the standards rulemaking, conforming changes to these sections
to reflect any final changes to the definition of combination vending
machine.
DOE agrees with AMS that the loading of non-refrigerated
compartments for the purposes of testing combination vending machines
requires clarification. The thermal mass of any items loaded into the
volumes that are not refrigerated may affect the measured DEC of
equipment and, as such, it is important that the loading of these
compartments be done consistently to ensure repeatable and comparable
results. DOE also notes that there is significant variability in the
thermal mass of the different ``non-sealed beverage merchandise'' that
might be loaded into the volumes that are not refrigerated. As such, as
mentioned previously, in this final rule, DOE is clarifying in section
2.2.1.3 of Appendices A and B to Subpart Q of Part 431 that, during
conduct of the test procedure, the non-refrigerated compartments of
combination vending machines must not be loaded with any standard
products or other vendible merchandise. In response to AMS's comment
suggesting that the refrigerated and non-refrigerated zones may not be
completely separated and, thus, should be considered in the calculation
of the standard level for combination equipment, DOE agrees with AMS
that some combination vending machines may be designed such that the
refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments are not completely
thermally isolated, such as from air leakage through a shared product
delivery chute. However, DOE notes that a refrigerated compartment that
has a thermal gradient is considered to be zone-cooled. As noted above,
DOE is continuing to consider how best to clarify the distinction
between refrigerated and non-refrigerated compartments in a combination
vending machine as part of the standards rulemaking. Regarding the
standard level for such combination equipment, DOE notes that
combination vending machines are not currently subject to standards but
that DOE is considering new standards for such equipment in the ongoing
BVM energy conservation standard rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-
STD-0022) DOE acknowledges that the fact that there may be some heat
transfer between the non-refrigerated and refrigerated volumes may
affect the appropriate energy conservation standard level, and DOE will
consider such in the setting of an appropriate standard level for this
equipment.
5. Loading of BVM Models When Conducting the DOE Test Procedure
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to add language
to the BVM test procedure to clarify the loading requirements for
beverage vending machines that are offered in a variety of
configurations and may be capable of vending other refrigerated
merchandise from their refrigerated volumes. 79 FR 46908, 46914 (Aug.
11, 2014). Specifically, DOE proposed to amend the regulatory text to
clarify that, for beverage vending machines that are available with a
variety of product storage configurations, the refrigerated
compartment(s) should be configured, for purposes of testing, to hold
the maximum number of sealed beverages that it is capable of
accommodating per manufacturer specifications. Id. For example, if some
areas of the refrigerated volume can be configured either to vend
sealed beverages or to vend other refrigerated merchandise, the
equipment should be configured and loaded with the maximum number of
sealed beverages in the refrigerated compartment(s) for testing.
DOE understands that tests conducted with other configurations may
produce different results because of the decrease in thermal mass in
the refrigerated space. Various configurations that differ in placement
and type of shelving only may be placed in the same basic model with
the performance at the maximum beverage configuration used to represent
the performance of all of the configurations in the basic model.
Alternatively, if a manufacturer wishes to make different
representations regarding the energy consumption of a beverage vending
machine in various shelving configurations, the manufacturer may elect
to test and certify each unique shelving configuration as a separate
basic model.\8\ In that case, the unique shelving configuration for
that BVM model would comprise the ``maximum beverage configuration''
for that model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ For purposes of beverage vending machines, basic model means
all units of a refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine (or class thereof) manufactured by one manufacturer, having
the same primary energy source, and which have essentially identical
electrical, physical, and functional characteristics that affect
energy consumption or energy efficiency. See 10 CFR 431.292. If
differing shelving configurations affect the energy consumption,
these differing configurations should be considered different basic
models, unless manufacturers elect to group BVM units that vary in
shelving configuration only into the same BVM basic model and rate
such model based on the performance of the shelving configuration
that holds the maximum number of sealed beverages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to DOE's proposed language regarding the loading
requirements for BVM models subject to the DOE test procedure, ASHRAE
SPC 32.1 expressed support for DOE's proposal to add language to the
DOE test procedure in Appendices A and B to clarify the loading
requirements for covered BVM models. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p.
2) DOE did not receive any negative comments on this proposal. As such,
in this final rule, DOE has added language to the DOE test procedure in
section 2.2.1 of Appendices A and B to clarify the loading requirements
for the refrigerated compartment(s) of BVM models. As noted in section
III.A.4 of this final rule, DOE is also clarifying that non-
refrigerated compartments should be left empty and not loaded with any
vendible products or merchandise.
6. Specifying the Characteristics of the Standard Product
When testing a BVM model in accordance with the DOE test procedure
established in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, the equipment is
to be loaded with the maximum quantity of standard products and with
standard test packages in each next-to-be-vended position for each
selection, as required by section 7.2.2.1 and 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2004. Section 5 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 further
requires that the standard product shall be 12-ounce cans for machines
that are capable of dispensing 12-ounce cans. For all other machines,
the standard product shall be the product specified by the manufacturer
as the standard product.
The DOE test procedure established in the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule does not provide any further specificity regarding the
characteristics of the standard product when conducting the DOE test
procedure or the manufacture of standard test packages. DOE understands
that there may be variability among manufacturers and testing
laboratories with regard to the characteristics of standard products
and
[[Page 45768]]
standard test packages. DOE believes that such variability may result
in minor inconsistencies in test results. As such, in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify the characteristics of the
standard product and standard test package to ensure test results are
as consistent and repeatable as possible. 79 FR 46908, 46914-46915
(Aug. 11, 2014). Specifically, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
proposed to add text to the BVM test procedure in Appendices A and B,
specifying that the standard product shall be:
Standard 12-ounce aluminum beverage cans filled with a
liquid with a density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/mL)
0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F for beverage vending machines that are capable of
vending cans,
20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a liquid with a
density of 1.0 g/mL 0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F for beverage
vending machines that are not capable of vending 12-ounce cans, but are
capable of vending 20-ounce bottles, and
the product specified by the manufacturer as the standard
product for beverage vending machines that are not capable of vending
12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles.
Id.
DOE selected a density range of 1.0 g/mL 0.1 g/mL, as
it is inclusive of most test fluids used today. For example, this
density range includes water, diet and regular soda, fruit juices, and
propylene glycol/water mixtures up to 50/50 percent by volume. In
addition, Fischer-Nickel conducted research in 2004 that compared the
temperature measurements of standard test packages constructed in the
manner specified by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1 to the test packages
described in ASHRAE Standard 117-2002, ``Method of Testing Closed
Refrigerators and Freezers,'' which are 1-pint plastic test packages
filled with a 50/50 mixture of water and propylene glycol; little
variation was found in measured temperatures when comparing different
test package materials and fluids.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Cowen, D. and Zabrowski, D. 2004. ``Application and
Evaluation of ASHRAE 117-2002 and ASHRAE 32.1-1997.'' FSTC Report #
5011.04.01. Fischer-Nickel, Inc. Available at: https://www.fishnick.com/publications/appliancereports/refrigeration/Application_of_ASHRAE_117_and_32.1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3 of ASHRAE 32.1-2004 and 2010 defines the standard test
package as a beverage container of the size and shape for which the
vending machine is designed, altered to include a temperature-measuring
instrument at its center of mass. DOE finds the requirements in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 and 2010 to be fairly clear and concise when
paired with the clarification above regarding the standard product.
Therefore, DOE did not propose additional clarifications regarding the
construction of standard test packages beyond the proposed
clarification that the standard product shall be 12-ounce cans or 20-
ounce bottles for BVM models that are capable of vending cans or
bottles, respectively, filled with a liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL
0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F. Id.
In response to DOE's proposals in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE received several comments from interested parties supporting DOE's
proposed clarifications. AMS expressed their approval of DOE's proposed
definition of a standard test package. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3)
Specifically, Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 agreed with DOE's assertion
that the most common standard products were 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce
bottles. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3; ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p.
2)
DOE also received several comments suggesting improvements or
requesting further clarification to the proposed standard product
specifications. Coca-Cola noted that beverage vending machines that
dispense 330 mL ``slimline'' cans (which have a higher ratio of height
to diameter than standard 12-ounce cans) also exist. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 3) AMS requested DOE clarify the standard products for helix
driven machines, noting that they typically do not dispense 12-ounce
cans. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 2-3) SVA supported clarity in what a
standard product was, and noted that flexibility was required for
machines designed to vend milk cartons, aseptic packs, pouches, and
energy drinks. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1)
DOE appreciates the comment from AMS in support of the definition
of a standard test package. DOE also appreciates the comments from
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and Coca-Cola acknowledging that 12-ounce cans or 20-
ounce bottles are the most common standard products and supporting
DOE's clarification of the standard product definition. In response to
the comments from Coca-Cola, SVA, and AMS regarding equipment that is
designed to vend non-standard products, such as ``slimline'' cans, milk
cartons, aseptic packs, pouches, and energy drinks, DOE agrees with
commenters that flexibility in the specification of the standard
product is required for beverage vending machines that are not capable
of vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles. DOE appreciates the
specific examples of such products provided by commenters where such
provision would be required. For such beverage vending machines, the
product specified by the manufacturer as the standard product shall
continue to be used in testing. DOE will determine the appropriate
standard product for use in testing by consulting manufacturer product
literature. DOE notes, however, that manufacturers may only test
equipment with products other than 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles if
the machine is not capable of vending either of these product types.
In light of these comments, DOE is not altering the clarification
regarding the standard product proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adding a clarification in
section 2.2.1.4 of Appendices A and B that the standard product shall
be 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles for BVM models that are capable of
vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles, respectively, filled with a
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL 0.1 g/mL at 36 [deg]F,
or the product specified by the manufacturer as the standard product
for beverage vending machines that are not capable of vending 12-ounce
cans or 20-ounce bottles.
7. Clarifying the Next-To-Vend Beverage Temperature Test Condition
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the test method incorporated by
reference in the DOE test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test
procedure final rule, states, ``the beverage temperature shall be
measured in standard test packages in each next-to-be-vended position
for each selection.'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 specifies an
average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F
``throughout test.'' The beverage temperature requirements of the ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 test method, which DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference in the DOE BVM test procedure as part of the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR (79 FR 46908, 46911-46912 (Aug. 11,
2014)), are identical to those of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004.
However, DOE became aware of a need to clarify whether the next-to-vend
temperature specification of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F
``throughout test'' refers to a condition in which the average next-to-
vend temperature is maintained at 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F
constantly for the duration of the test, or one in which the
temperature of next-to-vend beverages is averaged across all selections
and over the entire length of the test, resulting in a single value of
36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify its
test
[[Page 45769]]
procedure by explicitly stating that the temperature of next-to-vend
beverages shall be averaged across all next-to-vend beverages and over
the entire time of the test, resulting in a single value of 36 [deg]F
1 [deg]F. Specifically, to clarify this requirement, DOE
proposed to incorporate a definition of integrated average temperature
and define this term as the average of all standard test package
measurements in the next-to-vend beverage positions taken during the
test, expressed in degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F). 79 FR at 46915. That
is, the integrated average temperature is calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.020
Where:
TIAT = integrated average temperature, [deg]F ([deg]C),
Txi = measured beverage temperature for next-to vend test package x
at interval i,
d = total number of recorded intervals, and
n = total number of next-to-vend test packages.
In response to DOE's proposed definition of integrated average
temperature, SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 commented that they support DOE's
definition of integrated average temperature. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1;
ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3) ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Southern California
Edison (SCE), and AMS added that maintaining each individual
thermocouple within 1 [deg]F of 36 [deg]F was unnecessarily rigorous
and not possible in many machine designs. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at
pp. 2-3; SCE, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 43; AMS, No.
0007 at p. 3) Coca-Cola also stated their understanding that 36 [deg]F
1 [deg]F should be applied over the entire testing period
and cannot be maintained for every individual data measurement because
of programmed defrost cycles. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 3-4)
DOE appreciates the comments from SVA and ASHRAE SPC 32.1
supporting DOE's definition of integrated average temperature. In
response to comments from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, SCE, and AMS, DOE recognizes
that it is not possible to maintain individual standard test packages
in the next-to-vend beverage positions within 36 [deg]F 1
[deg]F for some equipment designs due to spatial variability within the
unit. In addition, DOE agrees with Coca-Cola's remarks that even an
instantaneous spatial average of all standard test packages in the
next-to-vend beverage locations may not be feasible to maintain
throughout the entire test period due to temporal temperature
variability resulting from defrost cycles or other compressor cycling
behavior. DOE notes that these comments are consistent with DOE's
proposed treatment of the ``average beverage temperature'' condition
and the definition of integrated average temperature proposed in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
Therefore, in section 1.2 of Appendices A and B, DOE is adopting
the definition of integrated average temperature proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR. DOE is also specifying, in section 2.1.1 of
Appendices A and B, that the integrated average temperature must be 36
[deg]F 1 [deg]F, or the lowest application product
temperature as discussed in section III.A.10 of this final rule, for
the purposes of testing equipment in accordance with the DOE test
procedure. 79 FR at 49615.
DOE notes that, while the integrated average temperature is the
measurement that must be used to comply with DOE's requirements
regarding the average beverage temperature of beverage vending machines
during the test period (excluding the stabilization period), the
instantaneous spatial average temperature of all standard test packages
in the next-to-vend beverage positions is still a relevant measurement
for the purposes of determining the presence of a refrigeration low
power mode (see section III.B.3 of this final rule) and for determining
temperature stabilization prior to initiating the test period.
Specifically, section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 specifies that
temperature stabilization is considered to be achieved 24 hours after
the ``average beverage temperature'' reaches 36 [deg]F 1
[deg]F (and measured energy consumption is within 2 percent for two
successive 6-hr periods). In this case, the ``average beverage
temperature'' specified in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 refers to the
``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature'' and not a
temporal average (i.e., the integrated average temperature). Therefore,
in this final rule, DOE is also adopting in section 1.2 of Appendices A
and B a new definition of instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage
temperature, which means the spatial average temperature of all
standard test packages in the next-to-vend beverage positions at a
given time. To clarify, using the previously discussed nomenclature,
the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature is
calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.021
Where:
Ti = average beverage temperature at interval i, [deg]F ([deg]C),
Txi = measured beverage temperature for next-to-vend test package x
at interval i, and
n = total number of next-to-vend test packages.
To clarify the applicability of the instantaneous average next-to-
vend beverage temperature to the temperature stabilization requirements
in the test procedure, DOE is also clarifying in section 2.1.1.1, that
temperature stabilization is considered to be achieved 24 hours after
the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature reaches 36
[deg]F 1 [deg]F.
Regarding the measurement of the integrated average temperature,
AMS and SVA requested that some means be provided by which the number
of thermocouples could be reduced. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3; SVA, No.
0008 at p. 1) AMS further suggested that, as there are many different
BVM geometries and configurations, manufacturers be allowed some
flexibility in how this was accomplished, provided it could be
demonstrated that the method used would generate equivalent DEC results
to testing with a thermocouple in each next-to-vend beverage location.
(AMS, No. 0007 at p. 3) Coca-Cola agreed with AMS and SVA and stated
that added temperatures sensors introduce additional points of air
infiltration into the machine and thus may upset the integrity of the
test. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 4).
In response to the comments from AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola regarding
reduction in the number of standard test packages required for testing
beverage vending machines, DOE agrees with commenters that there is
potential to reduce burden associated with testing beverage vending
machines with horizontal product configurations, which may have a large
number of next-to-vend beverage locations, by reducing the number of
standard test packages that are required to be loaded in the next-to-
vend beverage positions. Furthermore, DOE believes that provided the
standard test packages are spatially distributed across the face of the
beverage vending machine, the measured integrated average temperature
should not be significantly different than that determined with a
standard test package in each next-to-vend location. This is
particularly true for fully-cooled, Class A beverage vending machines
(which are the category of beverage vending machine that most commonly
has a horizontal product arrangement), since the temperature
distribution across the
[[Page 45770]]
standard test packages should be reasonably consistent. DOE also notes
that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is, similarly, considering changing the
requirements for loading standard test packages in equipment with
horizontal product arrangement to reduce the required number of
standard test packages.
Therefore, consistent with the submitted comments from interested
parties and the potential changes ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is considering, DOE
is amending the requirements for placement of standard test packages
for beverage vending machines with products arranged horizontally in
this final rule. In particular, DOE is specifying in section 2.2.1 of
Appendices A and B that, for refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machines with products arranged horizontally (e.g., on shelves
or in product spirals), standard test packages must be placed in the
refrigerated compartment(s) in the following locations, as shown in
Figure III.1:
1) For odd-number shelves, when counting starting from the bottom
shelf, standard test packages shall be placed at:
a) the left-most next-to-vend product location,
b) the right-most next-to-vend product location, and
c) for equipment with greater than or equal to five product
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product location in the
center of the shelf (i.e., equidistant from the left-most and right-
most next-to-vend product locations) if there are an odd number of
next-to-vend products on the shelf or the next-to-vend product location
immediately to the right and to the left of the center position if
there are an even number of next-to-vend products on the shelf.
2) For even-numbered shelves, when counting from the bottom shelf,
standard test packages shall be placed at either:
a) for equipment with less than or equal to six next-to-vend
product locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product location(s)
\10\ (1) one location towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location and (2) one location towards the center from the
right-most next-to-vend product location, or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For equipment with three next-to-vend product locations on
each shelf, the next-to-vend product location one location towards
the center from the left-most next-to-vend product location is the
same position as the next-to-vend product location one location
towards the center from the right-most next-to-vend product
location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b) for equipment with greater than six next-to-vend product
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product locations (1) two
locations towards the center from the left-most next-to-vend product
location and (2) two locations toward the center from the right-most
next-to-vend product location.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.022
As beverage vending machines with products arranged vertically, in
stacks, typically have far fewer next-to-vend beverage locations, DOE
has determined that such a sampling procedure is not necessary for this
equipment.
8. Defining ``Fully Cooled''
The 2009 BVM final rule established DOE energy conservation
standards for beverage vending machines in two
[[Page 45771]]
equipment classes: Class A and Class B refrigerated beverage vending
machines. 74 FR 44914, 44968 (Aug. 31, 2009). The distinguishing
criterion between these two equipment classes is whether the equipment
is fully cooled. 10 CFR 431.292.
DOE regulations, however, have never defined the term ``fully
cooled.'' In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to define
``fully cooled'' as a condition in which the refrigeration system of a
beverage vending machine cools products throughout the entire
refrigerated volume of a machine instead of being directed at a
fraction (or zone) of the refrigerated volume as measured by the
average temperature of the standard test packages in the furthest from
the next-to-vend product locations, which would be required to be no
more than 10 [deg]F above the integrated average temperature of the
standard test packages in the next-to-vend product locations. 79 FR
46908, 46916 (Aug. 11, 2014).
The proposed definition was predicated upon the different methods
of cooling used in Class A and Class B machines and the customer
utility provided by fully cooling the refrigerated space. Maintaining
all refrigerated beverages within 10 [deg]F of the next-to-vend
beverage temperature typically allows customers to select from more
beverages and ensures that the customer will receive a properly cooled
product, regardless of the product's vertical location in the machine.
79 FR at 46915-46917. DOE selected a temperature range of 10 [deg]F,
based on feedback from manufacturers, as a reasonable temperature bound
to differentiate fully cooled beverage vending machines. DOE also
verified this proposed temperature range based on limited testing of
beverage vending machines currently available on the market to
determine the typical temperature variability observed between the
next-to-vend and furthest from next-to-vend beverages in Class A and
Class B equipment, respectively. Id.
To accompany DOE's proposed definition of fully cooled, the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR also proposed to adopt an optional test method
that could be used to quantitatively differentiate between Class A and
Class B equipment. To confirm whether a given BVM model is fully
cooled, DOE proposed that temperature measurements be taken at the
next-to-vend and furthest from next-to-vend temperature positions to
confirm the proposed 10 [deg]F temperature differential. For beverage
vending machines with horizontal product rows, or spirals, DOE's
proposed test procedure required a standard test package at the back of
the horizontal product rows in the four corners of the machine (e.g.,
bottom right, bottom left, top right, and top left). For beverage
vending machines with standard products configured in a vertical stack,
the proposal included an additional standard test package at the top of
each stack. To determine if a given beverage vending machine is fully
cooled, manufacturers would calculate the average temperature of the
standard test packages in the furthest from the next-to-vend product
location over the entire test period and compare that value to the
integrated average temperature of standard test packages in the next-
to-vend beverage positions. If the difference between these two values
was less than or equal to 10 [deg]F, the tested unit would be
considered fully cooled. 79 FR at 46917.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE noted that this test
method would not be required to certify equipment, but would be the
method used by DOE to determine the appropriate equipment class for
enforcement purposes. Therefore, DOE noted that its proposed definition
and test method would not require manufacturers to take any additional
temperature measurements beyond what is currently specified in ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 and, as such, would not increase the burden
associated with conducting the DOE BVM test procedure. Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comments on its
proposed definition of ``fully cooled'' and the proposed fully cooled
validation test method. DOE was particularly interested in whether the
proposed definition aligns with the classifications of Class A and
Class B equipment currently used in industry. Id.
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated they are considering the removal of product
class definitions from the new ASHRAE test method. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
No. 0011 at p. 3) Coca-Cola commented that configurations such as
``zone cooled'' and ``fully cooled'' did not apply to the test method,
but to how the machine was rated. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.4)
Similarly, SVA commented that two classifications for beverage vending
machines were not needed. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) SVA also suggested
that DOE use the same test procedure for both classes. (SVA, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 50-55)
In response to the definition of ``fully cooled'' proposed in the
BVM test procedure NOPR, several interested parties recommended that
DOE consider an alternate differentiation between equipment types to
better capture differences in energy consumption, and suggested the
presence of a transparent or opaque front and the arrangement of
products within the machine as potential differentiating criteria that
are more appropriate and consistent with the differentiation between
equipment configurations applied in industry. (CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p.
1; Sanden Vendo America Inc., Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p.
52). Many interested parties also commented regarding the difficulty of
establishing a quantitative temperature threshold to differentiate
fully cooled equipment from non-fully cooled equipment that would be
applicable across all BVM models. (AMS, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
0004 at p. 54; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 1). Coca-
Cola and SVA also noted the potential for additional burden associated
with the fully cooled verification test procedure. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010
at p. 4; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2)
DOE considered all the comments received regarding the
classification of beverage vending machines based on the definition of
``fully cooled.'' In light of the extent and scope of the comments
received in response to the amendments proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR regarding the proposed definition of fully cooled,
alternative criteria for differentiating Class A and Class B equipment,
and the optional fully cooled verification test protocol, DOE wishes to
further consider potential classification options and criteria
suggested by interested parties. As such, DOE will respond to these
comments raised by interested parties and propose an alternative
approach as a part of the associated ongoing energy conservation
standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0022)). This
approach will provide interested parties an additional opportunity to
provide DOE with feedback and suggestions regarding the appropriate
classification criteria and definitions for Class A and Class B
beverage vending machines.
9. Placement of Thermocouples During Testing
The DOE test procedure established by the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule does not specify how to position thermocouple wires during
testing. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify
that, in order to avoid compromising the thermal integrity of the
vending machine, thermocouple wires should not be run through the
dispensing door. Instead, the wires should be fed through the
[[Page 45772]]
door gasket, as it will mold around them and maintain a better thermal
seal for the cooled compartment. DOE proposed to add text to the BVM
test procedure in Appendices A and B specifying that sensors shall be
installed in a manner that does not affect energy performance.
Specifically, DOE proposed to amend the regulatory text to require that
thermocouple wires be run through the door gasket and not through the
dispensing door of the beverage vending machine such that the sensor
pathway is sealed to prohibit airflow between the interior refrigerated
volume and the ambient room air. 79 FR 46908, 46917-46918 (Aug. 11,
2014).
In response to DOE's proposal regarding the routing of temperature
sensors and associated wiring, AMS, SVA, Royal Vendors, and Crane
Merchandising Systems (CMS) commented at the NOPR public meeting they
should be able to route thermocouples using whatever method was best
for their machine, including destructive methods such as drilling
holes. (AMS, No. 0004 at pp. 59-62; SVA, No. 0004 at pp. 62-63; Royal
Vendors, No. 0004 at pp. 63-64; CMS, No. 0004 at p. 65) Royal Vendors
emphasized that the routing method used by other manufactures would not
work for their machines and noted that they route thermocouple wire
through a removable panel in the base of the machine where the
refrigerant lines enter the machine. (Royal Vendors, No. 0004 at pp.
63-64) CMS suggested that DOE did not need to provide specificity as to
the placement of thermocouples for testing beyond requiring that they
be routed in a manner to reduce airflow and not run through the
dispensing door. (CMS, No. 0004 at p. 65) AMS suggested that
manufacturers could provide documentation with their certification
reports regarding the method that was used to route thermocouples when
testing the beverage vending machine to establish the certified rating.
AMS also recommended that DOE use the same method used by manufacturers
when conducting enforcement testing to ensure consistent results. (AMS,
No. 0004 at pp. 59-61) SVA also recommended DOE consider the reduction
of thermocouple placements in Class A ``shelf style'' beverage vending
machines in order to reduce the effects of airflow caused by
thermocouple wire routing. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 1)
DOE considered all the comments received regarding the placement of
thermocouples during testing. Manufacturers commented that many methods
may be used to route thermocouples and DOE should not limit the
allowable methods, since some methods are more feasible than the others
based on the specific equipment design. However, DOE acknowledges that
without specific, verifiable requirements, it is difficult to ensure
testing is conducted in accordance with any such test procedure
requirement. This is an issue both for certification testing, and for
ensuring repeatability of test results in DOE assessment and
enforcement testing.
As such, in this final rule, DOE maintains that the thermocouple
wires should not be run through dispensing doors compromising the
thermal integrity of the equipment, but instead should be run through
the door gasket or other alternate routes that would not affect the
performance of the machine. DOE is adopting requirements regarding
routing of thermocouples and other sensor wires in section 2.2.2 of
Appendices A and B.
DOE does not intend to limit the manner in which manufacturers
could route thermocouple wire when conducting certification testing and
will continue to allow manufacturers to use whatever method they deem
appropriate, including drilling holes in the side of the beverage
vending machine through which the thermocouple wire can be routed and
caulked in place to limit airflow. However, DOE notes that, even with
precise documentation, it may be difficult to repeat exactly what was
done by manufacturers during certification testing. Further, DOE does
not typically employ methods that require physical destruction or
permanent modification of the unit when conducting assessment or
enforcement testing. Therefore, when testing a BVM model during
assessment or enforcement testing, DOE will route thermocouple wire
through the door gasket such that the malleable gasket material is
compressed around the thermocouple wire to ensure a good seal and
prohibiting airflow between the interior refrigerated volume and the
ambient test chamber air. If a manufacturer uses a specific method for
routing of the thermocouple wires during their own certification
testing, it must document these specific steps as part of the test data
records maintained by the manufacturer in accordance with 10 CFR
429.71.
10. Establishing Testing Provisions at the Lowest Application Product
Temperature
The DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines requires that
an average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F
be maintained throughout the test, as discussed in section III.A.7 of
this final rule. While DOE recognizes that the majority of covered
beverage vending machines can be tested at the established rating
temperature of 36 [deg]F, DOE is aware of some unique BVM models that
are designed to operate much higher than 36 [deg]F and cannot operate
at 36 [deg]F, and thus cannot be tested in accordance with the DOE test
procedure. Manufacturers of such equipment currently must request a
test procedure waiver to comply with DOE's energy conservation
standards in accordance with 10 CFR 431.401.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ DOE issued a final rule amending its regulations governing
petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. 79 FR
26591 (May 9, 2014). This final rule was effective on June 9, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed
amendments to its test procedure for beverage vending machines to allow
covered beverage vending machines that cannot achieve an average next-
to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F to instead be
tested at their lowest application product temperature. 79 FR 46908,
46418 (Aug. 11, 2014).
DOE proposed that the lowest application product temperature would
describe the lowest temperature at which a beverage vending machine
model is capable of maintaining next-to-vend beverages and could
correspond to the lowest setting on a unit's thermostat. For beverage
vending machines that cannot maintain an average next-to-vend
temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F, the lowest application
product temperature provision would specify a revised average beverage
temperature for beverages in the next-to-vend product location, but
would not modify any other requirements of the DOE test procedure.
Equipment tested and certified using the lowest application product
temperature would be required to meet the standard applicable for its
equipment class and refrigerated volume, and the manufacturer would be
required to maintain records of the lowest application product
temperature at which a given model was rated. Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE requested comments on its
proposal to adopt a lowest application product temperature provision
for covered beverage vending machines that cannot be tested at the
specified average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1
[deg]F.
DOE received several comments on the applicability of establishing
testing provisions at the lowest application product temperature. AMS
and SVA
[[Page 45773]]
noted that all their machines can meet the 36 [deg]F requirement. (CMS,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 75-76; SVA, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 71-72) However, AMS commented that they
have machines where the lowest temperature setting is 40 [deg]F and
special software is required to set the system at 36 [deg]F. (AMS,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 71)
DOE received several comments in support of the proposed lowest
application product temperature provision. Specifically, Coca-Cola
agreed with DOE that the lowest application temperature should be used
only when the average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F could not be achieved; in cases where 36 [deg]F could
not be achieved, the ``lowest application temperature'' should be the
average temperature for which a 1 [deg]F tolerance is
maintained for steady state operation. However, Coca-Cola added that
the lowest application product temperature should not be based on the
thermostat set point, but instead should be based on the lowest
temperature the case is designed to operate at as specified by the
manufacturer. Coca-Cola further commented that lowest application
product temperature should only be applicable to cases that cannot
operate as cold as 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F; it should not be
applicable to machines designed to vend frozen products such as ice or
ice cream. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 5) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 also supported
DOE's proposal to adopt a lowest application product temperature
provision for covered beverage vending machines that cannot be tested
at the specified average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F, but recommends that the scope be limited to beverage
vending machines only, and not machines designed exclusively to vend
snacks or other perishable products. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p.
3)
CA IOUs also expressed their support of the alternative lowest
application product temperature provision for beverage vending machines
that cannot be tested at 36 [deg]F, but suggested that the test
procedure include a requirement for the manufacturer to indicate the
temperature at which the beverage vending machine was tested. (CA IOUs,
No. 0005 at p. 2)
SVA disagreed with DOE's proposal to test units at the lowest
application temperature, but noted that if allowed, the product should
be identified within a different classification, and the temperature
must be clearly labeled on the machine and identified in the DOE
listing. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) CMS also suggested that a new class of
equipment be introduced for models that cannot meet the 36 [deg]F
requirement to help people differentiate energy efficient models from
those that are not tested at the 36 [deg]F requirement. (CMS, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 77-80) NEEA commented that beverage
vending machines that do not go down to 36 [deg]F may pass the DOE test
but be ``energy hogs.'' (NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at
p. 72-75) Coca-Cola commented that refrigerated vending machines which
had their lowest applicable product temperature substantially higher
than 36 [deg]F were likely not beverage vending machines and that they
should therefore not be included in this test procedure, but instead
receive some alternative treatment. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 5)
Regarding how to determine the lowest application product
temperature for applicable equipment, AMS recommended that the lowest
application product temperature be determined by actual measurement
when the machine is operating at its lowest temperature. (AMS, No. 0007
at p. 4) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that the lowest thermostat setting
would be a reasonable approach for most equipment, but emphasized that
the reported lowest application product temperature should be the
integrated average temperature measurement, not the thermostat set
point. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3) NEEA suggested that a
proportional method of scaling the allowable energy consumption based
on the change in temperature could be used for equipment that cannot
reach the 36 [deg]F requirement. (NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No.
0004 at pp. 82-83) SVA commented that determining energy use can be
more complicated than just proportional scaling. (SVA, No. 0004-1 at p.
84)
Coca-Cola commented that testing a beverage vending machine by the
proposed clarifications of Appendix A would render different test
results from the current test method due to changes in temperatures and
the treatment of accessories. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 1)
DOE considered all comments submitted by interested parties
regarding testing at the lowest application product temperature.
Commenters generally agreed with DOE's proposal to test equipment that
cannot be operated at an integrated average temperature of 36 [deg]F
1 [deg]F at the lowest application product temperature,
and stated that the manufacturer should be required to record the
integrated average temperature at which the machine is rated. Thus, in
this final rule, DOE is adopting provisions in section 2.1.3 of
Appendices A and B to test beverage vending machines that cannot be
operated at an average next-to-vend temperature of 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F to instead be tested at their lowest application
product temperature, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
Some commenters also mentioned that machines tested at the lowest
application product temperature should be identified in a different
classification, and that the temperature should be identified on the
label and in the DOE listing. DOE notes that DOE's proposal regarding
the lowest application product temperature test provisions included a
requirement to report the lowest application product temperature of a
BVM basic model to DOE in the BVM basic model's certification report.
In this final rule, DOE is also specifying that equipment tested and
certified using the lowest application product temperature will be
required to meet the standard applicable for its equipment class and
refrigerated volume. DOE acknowledges that it will be easier for such
equipment to meet the applicable energy conservation standard, as the
energy use of beverage vending machines is a function of the
temperature differential between the refrigerated temperature and the
ambient conditions. Since the lowest application product temperature
test provisions require a higher integrated average temperature, the
measured DEC would be lower than a similar case tested at 36 [deg]F
1 [deg]F. DOE reiterates that the lowest application
product temperature test provisions are only applicable to equipment
that cannot be operated at 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F and, as
such, believes such test provisions will only be applicable to a small
number of models. Therefore, DOE does not believe separate standards
for such equipment are justified. In response to NEEA's proposal to
scale the applicable MDEC based on the temperature differential between
the tested lowest application product temperature and the specified
rating temperature of 36 [deg]F, DOE agrees with SVA that determining
the appropriate energy conservation standard level can be more
complicated than just proportional scaling. For example, fixed energy
consuming components, such as lighting and display signage, will not
scale based on the temperature differential between the refrigerated
compartment and the ambient air. However, DOE will monitor the number
of models certifying under the lowest application product temperature
provisions and, if a significant portion or increase in BVM
[[Page 45774]]
models using such provisions is observed, take any necessary corrective
action at that time.
DOE agrees with Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1's comment that the
lowest application product temperature provisions should be limited to
refrigerated beverage vending machines that operate warmer than 36
[deg]F 1 [deg]F and not freezers or other categories of
equipment that are not intended to vend sealed beverages, since
beverage vending machines are limited to commercial refrigerators. DOE
notes that this test procedure and the lowest application product
temperature provisions are only applicable to equipment that meets
DOE's definition of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine; namely equipment that (1) is a commercial refrigerator, (2)
refrigerates sealed beverages and (3) dispenses such sealed beverages
on payment. 10 CFR 431.292. In the 2014 commercial refrigeration
equipment test procedure final rule, DOE adopted a new definition of
commercial refrigerator, defined as a unit of commercial refrigeration
equipment in which all refrigerated compartments in the unit are
capable of operating at or above 32 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. 79 FR
22278, 22307-22308 (April 21, 2014). DOE has determined that this
definition is also applicable to beverage vending machines. As such, to
clarify that DOE's BVM test procedure and energy conservation standards
only apply to refrigerated equipment and not freezers that operate
below 32 [deg]F, in this final rule, DOE is amending the definition of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine to explicitly
reference the definition of commercial refrigerator located at 10 CFR
431.62. DOE notes that amending the definition of a refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machine is necessary since the term
``commercial refrigerator'' is referenced in the existing definition,
but the definition did not explicitly establish that the term
``commercial refrigerator'' refers to that defined under subpart C to
part 431 of title 10 of the CFR, which pertains to commercial
refrigeration equipment. DOE believes this effectively responds to
Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC 32.1's comments as, in DOE's view, it is
extremely unlikely that a beverage vending machine would be unable to
operate at 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F and still be able to operate
at or above 32 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. A beverage vending machine
that operates only between 32 and 34 [deg]F, however unlikely, would
meet DOE's definition of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine. In such a case, the beverage vending machine could be
rated under the lowest application product temperature provision, as
adopted, and the lowest application product temperature provision would
be 34 [deg]F.
DOE acknowledges ASHRAE SPC 32.1's affirmation of DOE's proposal
that the lowest application product temperature should be determined
for equipment with thermostats by the lowest thermostat setting. In
response to Coca-Cola's comment that the lowest application product
temperature should not be based on the thermostat set point, but
instead should be based on the lowest temperature the case is designed
to operate at as specified by the manufacturer, DOE notes that such a
requirement may be difficult to enforce and could create a loophole
whereby equipment could advertise temperatures above 38 [deg]F, but be
able to operate as cold as 36 [deg]F in the field. Therefore, in this
final rule, DOE is electing to maintain the specification that, for
equipment with a thermostat, the reported lowest application product
temperature is the actual measured integrated average temperature when
the thermostat is set at its lowest setting and not the reading on the
thermostat, as suggested by ASHRAE and AMS. As DOE did not receive any
comments on the specification of the lowest application product
temperature for equipment without thermostats, DOE is not including any
additional specificity in determining the lowest application product
temperature for such equipment at this time. However, DOE notes that
documentation supporting the determination of the LAPT should be
included as part of the test data records maintained by the
manufacturer in accordance with 10 CFR 429.71 underlying certification.
Regarding Coca-Cola's comment that testing using the lowest
application product temperature may have an impact on the measured DEC,
DOE acknowledges that changes in the integrated average temperature of
the interior refrigerated volume will alter the measured DEC of BVM
models. However, as stated earlier, DOE notes that such a provision is
only applicable to equipment that cannot operate at 36 [deg]F 1 [deg]F and DOE believes this represents very few models. Also,
under the BVM test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure
final rule, such equipment would be required to apply for a waiver,
since it currently cannot be tested. To date, DOE has not received any
waiver requests regarding BVM models that cannot operate at the
appropriate rating temperature.
With respect to the comment from AMS that some models may be
produced such that the lowest temperature setting is greater than the
test temperature specified by the DOE test procedure and special
software is required to set the system at 36 [deg]F, DOE notes that all
beverage vending machines must be tested and certified as shipped and
designed for use in the field. Therefore the use of specific controls
designed solely for use when testing the equipment that are not
available to a purchaser or operator of the equipment would not be
allowed in the DOE test procedure. If the machine, as distributed in
commerce, is unable to meet the temperature requirements of the DOE
test procedure, then the machine would be tested using its lowest
application product temperature as discussed in section III.A.10 of
this final rule.
11. Treatment of Certain Accessories During Testing
In reviewing the DOE test procedure for beverage vending machines,
DOE recognized that the existing test procedure does not clearly
specify the appropriate operation of some components and accessories
when conducting the test procedure. DOE understands that there is room
for various interpretations of the requirements for equipment
configuration where the DOE test procedure is currently ambiguous or
silent. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify
the proper configuration and operation of several specific components
and accessories in the DOE test procedure to remove this ambiguity and
improve the repeatability of the DOE test procedure. 79 FR 46908,
46919-46922 (Aug. 11, 2014).
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify that,
in general, any accessory or component that is integral to the intended
operation of the beverage vending machine must be operational during
the test. In this context, DOE interpreted ``integral'' to mean
necessary for operation of the BVM model in a manner that meets the DOE
definition of beverage vending machine--i.e., necessary for the BVM
model to cool bottled or canned beverages and/or dispense bottled or
canned beverages on payment. In addition, DOE proposed to clarify that
any manually controllable energy-consuming accessories that are
integral to the performance of the BVM refrigeration system must be in
place during testing if offered for sale with that basic model and must
be tested at the most energy-consuming setting. DOE
[[Page 45775]]
also proposed that accessories that are controlled by automatic
controls and are not configurable by the BVM operator must be tested in
the automatic state. Id. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
proposed to clarify these requirements by adding language in Appendices
A and B regarding the appropriate treatment of components and
accessories during testing. 79 FR at 46935, 46937.
In addition to these general requirements, DOE believed it would be
clearer and more precise to specify, to the extent possible, the
appropriate treatment of several common components and accessories that
might typically be found on beverage vending machines. Therefore, in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also proposed to include
provisions regarding the treatment of 11 specific components, including
(1) payment mechanisms; (2) interior lighting; (3) external customer
display signs, lights, or digital screens; (4) anti-sweat and other
electric resistance heaters; (5) condensate pan heaters; (6)
illuminated temperature displays; (7) condensate filters; (8) security
covers; (9) coated coils; (10) general purpose outlets; and (11)
crankcase heaters and electric resistance heaters for cold weather. 79
FR at 46919-46922, 46935-46938.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also emphasized that the
proposed clarifications served only to unambiguously clarify the intent
of the current DOE test procedure and, as such, would be required for
equipment testing as of 180 days after publication of this final rule.
In response to DOE's proposed treatment of accessories in general,
DOE received multiple comments regarding the treatment of accessories
not discussed explicitly in section III.A.11 of the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR and their configuration during testing. ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
Coca-Cola, and California IOUs agreed with DOE that the test procedure
should include components required to maintain the primary operation of
the machine to represent field performance, including components used
for maintaining product temperatures, accepting payment, allowing user
selection of product, and vending product during testing. (ASHRAE SPC
32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7; CA IOUs, No. 0005
at p.2) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 listed the following as potential accessories
that could be included on a beverage vending machine: payment devices
(e.g., coin mechanisms, bill validators, credit card readers, and
mobile phone payment), ADA accessibility equipment, screens (e.g.,
product selection touchscreens and pure advertisement screens),
computers that interface with screens, Wi-Fi routers, trash compactors,
and cold weather heating elements. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at pp. 3-
4)
AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola also supported DOE's proposal in Appendix A
to de-energize accessories non-essential to the vending process and
unnecessary to the machine's basic operation and they agreed that such
systems should be on if required for product selection or vending.
However, they commented that secondary systems, including secondary
payment systems, should not be required during testing. (AMS, No. 0007
at pp. 4-7; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7)
Specifically, Coca-Cola noted that new beverage vending machines are
being developed that incorporate new capabilities, utilize additional
transformative technologies, and are more innovative, and they
acknowledged that these additional services will add to the energy
consumption of the beverage vending machine in the field. (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 8) Coca-Cola provided the following list of potential
accessories that could be included on a beverage vending machine:
reverse vending systems for waste management, message displays and
interactive video walls not necessary for product selection, television
monitors, routers, and communication systems such as modems and blue-
tooth devices, consumer award management systems (that may receive caps
or coupons), and additional secondary payment systems (e.g., card
readers, key-fob readers). (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6) However, Coca-
Cola recommended that these features not be considered when
establishing a basic rating for the equipment as a beverage vending
machine. Coca-Cola further recommended that, if such energy consumption
were to be considered, the equipment be subject to different standards
that account for the additional functionality the machines provide.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 8)
AMS noted that they had encountered beverage vending machines with
a wide variety of accessories, including cell phone/laptop battery
chargers, Wi-Fi hotspots, reverse vending equipment (trash compactors),
and power assist features for handicapped consumers, in addition to the
accessories outlined in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR. AMS agreed
with DOE's proposal that such accessories be de-energized or set to
their lowest energy consuming state during testing under Appendix A.
However, in Appendix B, AMS recommended that such accessories only be
de-energized or set to their lowest energy consuming state if the BVM
controls would cause the accessories to automatically enter such states
under the conditions of the test. AMS clarified that, if such
accessories can be configured to operate at all times, they should be
left energized and operating during the test to capture the
representative field performance of the unit. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 6-
7)
California IOUs agreed with AMS that the energy consumption of such
features should be captured, and they recommended that the new test
procedure have provisions for including new but prevalent accessories
like networking capabilities and large displays while testing. (CA
IOUs, No. 0005 at p.2)
DOE agrees with the comments received from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Coca-
Cola, California IOUs, SVA, and AMS suggesting that the operation of
components necessary to provide the ``primary functionality'' of the
beverage vending machine as it would be installed in the field should
be operational during testing. DOE interprets ``components necessary
for primary functionality'' to mean the components necessary to cool
products and vend products on payment. However, as discussed further in
section III.A.11.a, in response to comments from SVA, AMS, and Coca-
Cola, DOE is also allowing for flexibility regarding the treatment of
payment mechanisms to accommodate typical equipment testing practices
in the industry.
DOE is adopting clarifying language in Appendices A and B
specifying that the rated beverage vending machine must only include
sufficient functionality necessary for cooling and vending sealed
beverages (except for payment mechanisms) during testing, including
functionality necessary for temperature management, product inventory,
product merchandising, product selection, and product transport and
delivery. Appendices A and B will further specify that any accessories
not fundamental to the primary operation of the equipment be de-
energized during testing, or placed in the lowest energy consuming
state if the component cannot be de-energized without affecting the
fundamental functionality of the beverage vending machine. That is, if
the accessory or component is required for the BVM model to cool
bottled or canned beverages and/or dispense bottled or canned beverages
on payment, then the accessory is required to be in place and
operational during testing. Accessories such as reverse vending for
waste management, wireless
[[Page 45776]]
portals, and other systems that do not impact the performance of the
machine must be de-energized during testing, or placed in the lowest
energy consuming state. DOE notes that this language and approach is
consistent with that being considered by ASHRAE SPC 32.1.
DOE believes that testing with only those devices and accessories
necessary for primary functionality of the beverage vending machine for
its fundamental purpose of cooling and vending refrigerated beverages
provides a representative and consistent basis for comparing the energy
performance of beverage vending machines. DOE acknowledges the concerns
of interested parties that additional accessories may increase the
energy consumption of beverage vending machines in the field. However,
as noted by Coca-Cola, these functions are secondary and tangential to
the functionality of the equipment as a beverage vending machine. DOE
also agrees with commenters that, given the number and variety of such
potential accessories, it is more consistent and straightforward to
test equipment with any such auxiliary features de-energized or placed
in the lowest energy consuming state.
In response to AMS's comment that only those devices that are
automatically placed in their lowest energy consuming state when
installed and energized be allowed to enter such a state during
testing, DOE believes that its adopted approach provides the most
representative, repeatable, and comparable performance for tested BVM
equipment. However, DOE notes that under Appendix A, any components or
accessories that are controlled by automatic controls that are
permanently operational and cannot be adjusted by the machine operator
must be operated in the automatic state, in accordance with ANSI/ASHRAE
23.1-2010. In Appendix B, DOE is adopting more specific treatment for
automatic controls, including both those that can be adjusted by the
machine operator and those that cannot. DOE's provisions for these
``accessory low power mode'' controls are described further in section
III.B.2.
Coca-Cola also commented that testing a beverage vending machine
using the proposed clarifications of Appendix A would render different
test results from the current test method due to changes in
temperatures and treatment of accessories. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.
1)
In response to Coca-Cola's comment that the amendments in Appendix
A will affect the measured energy consumption of refrigerated beverage
vending machines, DOE reiterates that the measured energy consumption
under the DOE test procedure is not affected; the amendments and
clarifications included in Appendix A serve only to clarify the
provisions of the existing BVM test procedure and ensure equipment are
tested consistently among manufacturers and test labs.
The following sections III.A.11.a through III.A.11.k discuss the
proposed treatment of 11 specific features, components, and accessories
under the DOE test procedure, as well as any comments received and the
specific amendments DOE is adopting in this final rule for those 11
specific components.
a. Payment Mechanisms
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE stated its belief that
payment mechanisms are integral to the vending function of the beverage
vending machine and, accordingly, should be in place and functional
during testing. Specifically, DOE proposed that when testing a vending
machine, the most energy-consuming combination of payment mechanisms
should be used. 79 FR 46908, 46919 (Aug. 11, 2014). DOE also noted that
all other BVM models equipped with less energy-consumptive combinations
of payment mechanisms may be listed as different individual models
covered under that basic model or as unique basic models, if
manufacturers wish to certify and make representations regarding the
energy use of each combination of money processing equipment. Id.
In response to DOE's proposal, AMS objected to the inclusion of any
money processing accessories as part of Appendix A or Appendix B during
testing based on the fact that beverage vending machines usually are
not shipped with these accessories and that most, if not all, of the
BVM manufacturers currently omit these accessories while testing. (AMS,
No. 0007 at pp. 4-5) SVA urged DOE to not consider payment mechanisms
during testing because of the large number of variations involved,
keeping the baseline more consistent across models and manufacturers.
(SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) AMS and SVA also noted that including payment
mechanisms would make the testing process burdensome, as there are a
large number of different models and manufacturers of these money
processing accessories. (AMS, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at
pp. 120-121; SVA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 121-122
and SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) Coca-Cola commented that machines are
typically sold without payment systems and disagreed with DOE's
analysis that the most energy-consuming combination of payment
mechanisms be used for the test. Additionally, Coca-Cola noted that
manufacturers had standard payment systems for machines, and
recommended that the standard payment systems be used for the test.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 7) Conversely, NEEA commented that the test
procedure should include payment mechanisms, as this reflects field
conditions. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 2) During the public meeting, SVA and
NEEA suggested that payment mechanisms should be included as part of
Appendix B only. (SVA, No. 0004 at pp. 121-122; NEEA, No. 0004 at pp.
122-123)
DOE considered all comments received regarding the treatment of
payment mechanisms in developing the provisions adopted in this final
rule. DOE agrees with the comment from NEEA that payment mechanisms
should be included in the test procedure to reflect field conditions.
However, DOE understands that due to the wide variety of available
payment mechanism combinations, determining and testing with the most
energy-consuming combination of payment mechanisms may be burdensome
for manufacturers. DOE realizes that, as beverage vending machines are
often sold or shipped without payment mechanisms in place, BVM
manufacturers may not have control or knowledge of the payment
mechanism that may be installed in the field and, as such, selecting
the most energy-consuming combination, as originally proposed by DOE,
may not be feasible.
Based on the comments submitted by interested parties, DOE
considered several options to account for the energy use of payment the
mechanisms. Given that payment mechanisms are variable and are not
always included in the machine at the time of sale, DOE understands
that it is difficult to unambiguously specify a ``representative''
payment mechanism or device combination that would be applicable to all
BVM basic models and consistent across all units of each model. With
this in mind, DOE believes that conducting physical testing of beverage
vending machines with no payment mechanisms installed, as opposed to
testing with the payment mechanisms in place, is the most
straightforward, repeatable, and unambiguous approach. DOE notes that
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is also currently considering updating ASHRAE 32.1 to
specify that testing be performed without payment mechanisms installed.
[[Page 45777]]
However, DOE maintains that payment mechanisms are integral to the
vending function of the beverage vending machine and, therefore,
represent part of the primary functionality of the beverage vending
machine, as discussed in III.A.11. Accordingly, DOE believes that it is
important for the energy consumption of a payment mechanism to be
captured in the DEC of a beverage vending machine. To provide a
standardized and consistent method of accounting for payment mechanism
energy consumption when a BVM model is being tested without such a
device or devices installed, DOE is specifying a default energy
consumption value for payment mechanisms that will be added to the
tested primary rated energy consumption per day (ED) shown
in section 7.2.3.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1-2010 to determine the DEC of
tested equipment.
To determine the default payment mechanism energy consumption value
that would be representative of the typical energy consumption of such
devices in the field, DOE conducted a search of available payment
mechanisms for beverage vending machines and their respective published
power or energy consumption values. Through this search, DOE found 25
different models of payment mechanisms: 11 coin mechanisms, 11 bill
validators, and 3 credit card readers. DOE found that coin mechanisms
have an average idle mode power consumption of 7.1W, while bill
validators have an average idle mode power consumption of 6.8W and
credit card readers have an average idle mode power consumption of 12W.
DOE referenced the idle mode energy consumption of these devices
because no vending occurs during the BVM test procedure.
DOE calculated the average daily energy consumption for each device
category based on the average power consumption estimates for each of
the three payment mechanism categories. DOE estimates that coin
mechanisms consume approximately 0.17 kWh/day, bill validators consume
approximately 0.16 kWh/day, and credit card readers consume
approximately 0.29 kWh/day. DOE notes that these values are
representative of the amount of energy such devices would consume if
installed on a beverage vending machine tested in accordance with the
DOE test procedure. After considering these representative energy
consumption values and the variability in the payment mechanism
available to the manufacturer to install in the machine, DOE weighted
the average daily energy consumption of the three most comment payment
mechanisms. Since credit card readers are often leased from a separate
company, the energy consumption of coin mechanisms and bill validators
were weighted more heavily than the energy consumption of credit card
readers. After weighting the representative energy consumption values,
DOE determined that a default daily energy consumption value of 0.20
kWh/day is an appropriate representative value for the energy
consumption associated with payment mechanisms. This value is also
representative of a worst-case coin mechanism or bill validator because
it is higher than the average energy consumption of the coin mechanisms
or bill validators. DOE acknowledges that any given BVM basic model may
have a payment mechanism or combination of payment mechanisms that uses
more or less energy than this default value when installed in the
field. However, for the purposes of rating equipment based on testing
conducted in accordance with the DOE test procedure, the beverage
vending machine shall be tested without any payment mechanism installed
(or with any existing payment mechanisms de-energized or set to the
lowest energy consuming state, if it cannot be de-energized) and the
DEC rating shall be determined as the sum of the measured primary daily
energy consumption per day and the default payment mechanism energy
consumption value (0.20 kWh/day). Any representations regarding the
energy consumption of equipment rated under this approach must be made
based on this calculated DEC, regardless of the payment mechanism or
combination of payment mechanisms with which any given BVM unit is
actually sold.
Regarding the comment from Coca-Cola that manufacturers may wish to
test with standard payment systems for the beverage vending machines
they produce, DOE wishes to clarify that manufacturers must make
representations regarding the energy consumption of beverage vending
machines based on the testing and calculations performed under the DOE
test procedure. DOE surveyed many BVM manufacturers and payment
mechanism manufacturers regarding the existence of any default or
``standard'' payment mechanism device and was not able to identify one
that was applicable to all BVM manufacturers and models. As such, DOE
is instead adopting an approach whereby beverage vending machines that
differ only based on number and type of payment mechanism may be
certified under a single basic model listing based on the tested energy
consumption of the BVM model with no payment mechanism installed (or
the payment mechanism de-energized or set to the lowest energy
consuming state, if it cannot be de-energized) plus the 0.20 kWh/day
default energy consumption value for payment mechanisms.
In response to SVA and NEEA's suggestion that DOE include the
energy consumption of payment mechanisms in Appendix B only, DOE
reiterates its belief that money processing is an integral part of the
primary functionality of the beverage vending machine, namely the
vending function. DOE disagrees that the current test procedure does
not include the energy consumption of the payment mechanisms. In fact,
the current DOE test procedure for BVMs at 10 CFR 431.294(b) requires
testing in accordance with the test procedures specified in section 4,
``Instruments,'' section 5, ``Vending Machine Capacity,'' section 6,
``Test Conditions,'' and sections 7.1 through 7.2.3.2, under ``Test
Procedures,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, ``Methods of Testing
for Rating Vending Machines for Bottled, Canned, and Other Sealed
Beverages.'' (Incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293). More
specifically, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 states that the machine
shall be ``installed in accordance with the manufacturer's
instructions'' and ``operated with normal lighting and control
settings, using only those energy management controls that are
permanently operational and not capable of being adjusted by a machine
operator'' (7.1.1(a) and (d), respectively). DOE has interpreted these
provisions of the test procedure as requiring the BVM to be tested with
the payment mechanism as it would be installed in the field. As such,
DOE is continuing to require testing of beverage vending machines in a
manner that accounts for the energy consumption of all features that
contribute to the primary functionality of the beverage vending
machine, including payment mechanisms, in both Appendix A and Appendix
B. Given the comment we received in response to DOE's proposal in the
NOPR, DOE believes that it is important to clarify and streamline the
applicability of the current test procedure provisions in Appendix A to
reduce burden on manufacturers. Consequently, DOE is adopting a
streamlined method of calculating and including the energy use with a
typical payment system in sections 2.2.3.1 and 2.3 of Appendix A
[[Page 45778]]
and sections 2.2.5.1 and 2.3 of Appendix B.
b. Interior Lighting
Beverage vending machines typically include lighting to illuminate
the vendible products, in the case of Class A equipment, or illuminate
display panels that are part of the physical walls of the beverage
vending machine, in the case of Class B equipment. In both cases, these
lights are internal to the physical walls of the beverage vending
machine and, thus, are deemed integral to the operation of the
equipment. Through incorporation of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the
DOE test procedure adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule
currently requires beverage vending machines to be tested with ``normal
lighting and control settings.'' The revised ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2010 includes the same requirement.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE recognized that this
requirement could be interpreted differently in various circumstances
and, as such, proposed to amend the regulatory text to clarify the
treatment of internal lighting when conducting the DOE test procedure.
Specifically, DOE proposed an amendment to the regulatory text stating
that lighting that is contained within, or is part of the physical
boundary of, the beverage vending machine established by the top,
bottom, and side panels of the equipment be placed in its maximum
energy consuming state, as DOE believes that the maximum energy
consuming state is consistent with the ``normal'' setting and is the
operation most commonly employed in the field. 79 FR at 46921.
In response to DOE's proposal in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
AMS, SVA, Coca-Cola, and ASHRAE SPC 32.1 supported DOE's proposal to
specify that internal lighting operation must be operated in the
maximum energy-consuming state during testing. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 6;
SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6; ASHRAE SPC 32.1,
No. 0011 at p. 3) SVA and AMS supported DOE's proposal to include such
clarifications in both Appendices A and B, and noted that they both
currently test equipment with the interior lighting in the maximum
energy consuming state. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 6; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2)
SVA further noted that software modes that shut off the lighting system
when not in use were probably unlawful if used to influence the outcome
of the energy consumption test. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2) Coca-Cola added
that many of their machines employ energy management routines that have
an impact on the lighting of the machine. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6)
However, ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and Coca-Cola cautioned that machines may have
been tested differently in the past, and the new test procedure could
significantly change energy consumption values previously reported.
(ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 3; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 6)
DOE appreciates comments from AMS, SVA, Coca-Cola, and ASHRAE SPC
32.1 supporting DOE's proposal. Receiving no negative comments, in this
final rule, DOE is clarifying that interior lighting that is contained
within, or is part of the physical boundary of the beverage vending
machine established by the top, bottom, and side panels of the
equipment, shall be placed in its maximum energy consuming state for
testing.
In response to the comments submitted by Coca-Cola and ASHRAE SPC
32.1 noting that previous tests may have been conducted using methods
not consistent with the provisions DOE is adopting in this final rule,
DOE reiterates that because the DOE test procedure was previously
silent or ambiguous on the specific treatment of some components, it is
possible that some BVM manufacturers misinterpreted DOE's test
procedure and, thus, some BVM models were tested inconsistently. DOE
acknowledges that some BVM models may require recertification based on
these new clarifications. However, DOE continues to maintain that the
clarified treatment of interior lighting serves only to unambiguously
clarify the intent of the DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE is adding
this clarifying language to section 2.2.3.2 of Appendix A and section
2.2.5.2 of Appendix B for certifying equipment in accordance with
existing and any amended energy conservation standards, respectively.
c. External Customer Display Signs, Lights, or Digital Screens
In addition to interior lighting, discussed in section III.A.11.b,
DOE recognizes that some beverage vending machines may incorporate
additional external customer display signs, lights, and/or digital
screens outside of the body of the refrigerated BVM cabinet. In this
case, such external customer display signs, lights, and/or digital
screens are optional and are not integral to the cabinet, but external
customer display signs, lights, may significantly increase the energy
use of beverage vending machines that include those features. However,
such external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens are
not explicitly addressed in the DOE test procedure, as adopted in the
2006 BVM test procedure final rule, or in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-
2004 and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010. In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify that customer display signs, lighting,
and digital screens external to the beverage vending machine and not
integral to the operation of the primary refrigeration or vending
functions (e.g., digital screens that are not necessary for consumers
to make a product selection) may be disabled, disconnected, or
otherwise de-energized. 79 FR at 46920-46921. However, in the case that
the customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens are integral
to the functionality of the beverage vending machine, in that it cannot
perform the primary refrigeration and vending functions if such
equipment is disabled or removed, DOE clarified that the integral
customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens should be put in
the lowest energy-consuming state that maintains primary functionality
of the beverage vending machine. For example, if a digital screen
performs the vending or money processing function, that screen would be
placed in its lowest energy-consuming state that still allows the money
processing feature to function; this would provide equitable treatment
with other payment mechanisms that must be energized, as specified in
section III.A.11.a. Id.
DOE proposed to include this clarification in Appendix A, to be
used when certifying equipment under existing standards, based on the
fact that such external customer display signs, lights, or digital
screens are not mentioned in the existing DOE test procedure, as
adopted in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, and are peripheral
to the primary functionality of a beverage vending machine, as
discussed in section III.A.11. DOE also noted that such treatment is
consistent with interpretation to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, which
states that ``the Standard (32.1) addresses the refrigerated/delivery
system portion of the machine. Thus, any peripheral devices, not
necessary for the basic function of the vending machine are not
addressed by Standard 32.1.'' Id.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed similar treatment
for Appendix B, but also proposed to define a new term, ``standby
mode'' to more unambiguously specify the state in which external
customer display signs, lights, and digital screens would be placed if
they cannot be de-energized without affecting the primary functionality
of the beverage vending machine under test. DOE proposed to
[[Page 45779]]
define standby mode as the mode of operation in which any external,
integral customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens are
connected to main power, do not produce the intended illumination,
display, or interaction functionality, and can be switched into another
mode automatically with only a remote user-generated or an internal
signal. DOE proposed to clarify that, in Appendix B, that if the
external, integral customer display signs, lighting, or digital screens
do not have a standby mode, the integral customer display signs,
lighting, or digital screens would be placed in the lowest energy-
consuming state, and, if a digital screen performs the vending or money
processing function, that screen should be placed in its lowest energy-
consuming state that still allows the money processing feature to
function, similar to Appendix A. Id.
In response to DOE's proposed treatment of external customer
display signs, lights, or digital screens in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola supported DOE's proposal to de-
energize accessories non-essential to the vending process and
unnecessary to the machine's basic operation, and agreed that such
systems should be on if required for product selection or vending. The
commenters supported such a proposal for both Appendices A and B. (AMS,
No. 0007 at pp. 6-7; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 2; Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p.
7) NEEA commented that capturing the standby energy usage of integral
signage might drive manufacturers to move to external signage and
discourage integral smart controls to reduce energy usage of integral
signage. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p. 2)
DOE appreciates comments from AMS, SVA, and Coca-Cola supporting
DOE's proposed treatment of external customer display signs, lighting,
and digital screens. DOE acknowledges NEEA's comment regarding the
potential for manufacturers to move to external signage to avoid
accounting for the standby energy usage of internal signage, but
believes that there is a limited capacity for them to do so, since any
interior lighting used to illuminate product or equipment side panels
will inherently be integral to the unit and, thus, must be operated in
the maximum energy consumption state, as specified in earlier in this
section. The one example where interior lighting that must be energized
under the DOE test procedure might have opportunity to be replaced by
an external display screen that does not have to be energized under the
DOE test procedure may be on beverage vending machines that currently
incorporate illuminated side panels to serve a marketing and
advertising function. The illuminated side panels could, theoretically,
be replaced by external digital screens. However, DOE notes that, based
on DOE's review of existing Class B equipment, the illuminated side
panels currently available on the market are typically quite large,
covering the entire side of the beverage vending machine, and any
replacement illuminated sign or digital screen would likely be
equivalently large. DOE believes that such large display screens or
individually manufactured external illuminated signage would be
significantly more expensive than the current equipment design with
interior lighting and, as such, DOE believes the likelihood that
manufacturers will migrate to external signage solely to decrease the
measured energy consumption of their equipment is very low.
Regarding the proposed definition of ``standby mode'' in Appendix
B, AMS supported DOE's proposed definition, but stated that the list of
accessories should be expanded from external, integral display signs,
lighting, or digital screens to all accessories that might be applied
to beverage vending machines. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 6-7) NRCan
suggested renaming the standby mode to ``external accessory standby
mode'' for clarity. (NRCan, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p.
116) Coca-Cola suggested an alternative definition. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 8) Specifically, Coca-Cola suggested the following
definition for standby mode for beverage vending machines: ``Standby
mode is the state that the vending machine is in when it does not have
to deliver product, is not intended to deliver product, or cannot be
used to select and purchase a product. In this mode of operation any
powered element can be in a different state than when the machine is in
normal operation delivering product to a consumer. Standby mode can be
activated automatically by programming or by sensory devices monitoring
internal functions or external conditions and activity.'' (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 8)
DOE appreciates the comment from AMS supporting the definition of
the standby mode for external customer display signs, lights, or
digital screens. In response to expanding the applicability of the
standby mode definition, to DOE's knowledge there are not any other
accessories that the definition would impact in a way that is not
already accounted for in the test procedure as adopted in this final
rule. DOE considered the modifications in the comments from NRCan and
Coca-Cola regarding the name and definition of standby mode as it
applies to external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens.
DOE agrees with NRCan's proposal to rename the definition of standby
mode to be more specific to the accessories to which it is applied, and
is incorporating such a change in this final rule. In response to Coca-
Cola's suggested changes to the definition of standby mode, DOE
believes the changes in fact alter the applicability and intent of the
definition. Coca-Cola's suggested changes appear to apply to the
beverage vending machine as a whole, rather than just the external
customer display signs, lights, or digital screens. Consistent with
NRCan's suggestion, DOE's standby mode definition is applicable to
external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens and, as
such, DOE believes that Coca-Cola's proposed edits are not applicable
in this case.
Additionally, in light of consideration of the stakeholder comments
after publication of the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE reviewed
many styles of external customer display signs, lights, and digital
screens and determined that the previously-proposed clarifications for
Appendices A and B are materially the same. Specifically, both
appendices clarify that customer display signs, lighting, and digital
screens must be:
(1) Disabled, disconnected, or otherwise de-energized, if possible
and if doing so does not interfere with the primary functionality of
the beverage vending machine, or
(2) placed in its lowest energy consuming state or standby mode (in
Appendix B) if the equipment cannot be de-energized, or
(3) placed in the lowest energy consuming state that maintains
primary functionality of the beverage vending machine. As Table III.3
illustrates, the only difference between the proposed Appendices A and
B methodologies is the incorporation of ``standby mode'' as the
preferred operational state if the equipment cannot be de-energized or
disconnected.
[[Page 45780]]
Table III.3--Summary of Proposed Operational State for External Display
Signs, Lights, or Digital Screens in Appendix A and Appendix B in the
2014 BVM TP NOPR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
External customer display Operational state
sign, lights, or digital -------------------------------------------
screen characteristics Appendix A Appendix B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can be de-energized and do Disabled, Disabled,
not participate in primary disconnected, or disconnected, or
functionality of the otherwise de- otherwise de-
beverage vending machine. energized. energized.
Cannot be de-energized...... Place in lowest Placed in ``standby
energy consuming mode,'' if
state. available, or
lowest energy
consuming state.
Necessary for primary Placed in lowest Placed in lowest
functionality of beverage energy consuming energy consuming
vending machine. state that state that
maintains primary maintains primary
functionality of functionality of
the beverage the beverage
vending machine. vending machine.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This difference between the proposed language for the two
appendices would only result in a material difference in the test
procedure if there is a difference between ``standby mode'' and the
``lowest energy consuming state'' for external customer display signs,
lights, or digital screens that cannot be de-energized. However, for
external customer display signs, lights, or digital screens DOE
reviewed, the ``standby mode'' defined in Appendix B is the same as the
``lowest energy consuming state'' for equipment that cannot be de-
energized and does not participate in the vending function of the
beverage vending machine. Therefore, for the sake of clarity and
consistency, in this final rule, DOE is aligning the treatment of
external customer display signs, lights, and digital screens in
Appendices A and B. In these final rule amendments, the definition of
external accessory standby mode and the proposed treatment in Appendix
B will be applicable to both appendices. Specifically, DOE is
establishing provisions in section 2.2.3.3 of Appendix A and section
2.2.5.3 of Appendix B to clarify that all external display signs,
lights, and digital screens should be de-energized or, if they cannot
be de-energized without impacting the primary functionality of the
equipment, placed in the external accessory standby mode (if available)
or the lowest energy consuming state (if no external accessory standby
mode is available) that maintains such functionality. DOE also is
establishing a definition of external accessory standby mode. DOE
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR to define ``standby mode''
as the mode of operation in which the external, integral customer
display signs, lighting, or digital screens are connected to the main
power; do not produce the intended illumination, display, or
interaction functionality; and can be switched into another mode
automatically with only a remote user-generated or an internal signal.
DOE is now incorporating this definition into section 1.2 of both
Appendices A and B as the definition for ``external accessory standby
mode.'' As discussed previously, DOE believes that keeping the language
consistent across the two appendices will ensure continuity and
minimize unnecessary confusion.
d. Anti-Sweat and Other Electric Resistance Heaters
Some beverage vending machines may come equipped with anti-sweat
electric resistance heaters that serve to evaporate any water that
condenses on the surface of the door or walls during operation.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the test
procedure to clarify that anti-sweat and other electric resistance
heaters should be operational during testing under the DOE test
procedure. DOE also proposed to clarify that models with a user-
selectable setting must be turned on and set to the maximum usage
position, and that models featuring an automatic, non-user-adjustable
controller that turns on or off based on environmental conditions must
be operating in the automatic state. Additionally, DOE proposed to
amend the regulatory text to clarify that, if a unit is not shipped
with a controller from the point of manufacture, but is intended to be
used with a controller, the manufacturer must make representations of
the basic model based upon the rated performance of that basic model as
tested when equipped with an appropriate controller. 79 FR at 46921.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendments
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding anti-sweat and
other electric resistance heaters. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE
is incorporating the clarifying provisions into section 2.2.3.4 of
Appendix A and 2.2.5.4 of Appendix B regarding the treatment of anti-
sweat and other electric resistance heaters as proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR.
e. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps
Beverage vending machines capture water from the air entering the
cabinet during operation by causing the water to condense and then
freeze on the evaporator coil of the equipment. During a defrost cycle,
this frost is melted, and the meltwater produced must be removed from
the unit. In many types of equipment, this meltwater is collected in a
pan beneath the unit. Some models of beverage vending machines come
equipped with electric resistance heaters that evaporate this water out
of the pan and into the ambient air. Other models may come equipped
with pumps that pump meltwater to an external drain.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to add clarifying
language to the DOE test procedure in Appendices A and B requiring that
these electric resistance heaters and condensate pumps be installed and
operational during testing pursuant to the DOE test procedure as they
would be used in the field during the entire test. DOE proposed to
clarify that prior to the start of the24 hour period used to determine
temperature stabilization prior to the start of the test period
(hereafter referred to as ``stabilization period''), the condensate pan
should be dry and that, during the entirety of the period of the test
following the start of the stabilization period, any condensate
moisture generated should be allowed to accumulate in the pan as it
would during normal operation. DOE proposed to require that, if the
condensate heater or pump was equipped with controls to initiate the
operation of the heater or pump based on water level or ambient
conditions, these controls be enabled and the heater or pump be
operated in the automatic setting, but that water should not be
manually added to or removed from the condensate pan at any time during
the entire test. 79 FR at 46921-46922. Because manufacturers may offer
condensate pan heaters and pumps that are shipped separately from
[[Page 45781]]
the specific beverage vending machine unit with which they would be
used in normal operation, DOE also proposed to clarify that any
beverage vending machines distributed in commerce with an available
condensate pan heater or pump must be tested with the feature in place.
Id.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendment
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding condensate pan
heaters and pumps. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the
clarifications proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR with no
modifications as sections 2.2.3.5 and 2.2.5.5 of Appendix A and
Appendix B, respectively.
f. Illuminated Temperature Displays
Manufacturers may equip some beverage vending machine models with
illuminated displays that provide visual information to the equipment
operator regarding, for example, the temperature of the refrigerated
volume of the unit. DOE understands this feature to be integral to the
design of the given model and, as such, in the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, proposed to amend the test procedure to clarify that any
illuminated temperature displays should be enabled during testing as
they would be during normal field operation. 79 FR at 46922.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendment
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding illuminated
temperature displays. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting
clarifying language in section 2.2.3.6 of Appendix A and section
2.2.5.6 of Appendix B to specify that illuminated temperature displays
must be enabled during the test as they would be during normal field
operation, consistent with what was proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR.
g. Condenser Filters
Manufacturers may offer models equipped with nonpermanent filters
over a model's condenser coil to prevent particulates from blocking the
condenser coil and reducing airflow. In the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE proposed adding clarifying language requiring that these
filters be removed during testing pursuant to the DOE test procedure,
as such accessories are optional and are not required for operation of
the beverage vending machine. 79 FR at 46922.
In response to DOE's proposed treatment of condenser filters in the
2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, CMS commented that if a beverage vending
machine is equipped with a condenser filter, it should be tested with
one installed, as it can increase the energy consumption of the unit.
(CMS, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 100) DOE did not
receive any additional comments on this topic.
DOE acknowledges CMS's comment regarding condenser filters, but
while condenser filters may impact long-term energy consumption of
beverage vending machines in the field, these optional condenser
filters are not expected to significantly impact energy use over the
relatively short duration of the DOE test procedure. DOE further notes
that many options of condenser filter styles or manufacturers may be
available, complicating and adding burden to the DOE test procedure. As
condenser filters are more important for the long-term reliability of
the equipment in the field than the tested energy consumption, DOE does
not believe the additional burden associated with requiring the testing
and certification of a number of different BVM models based on small
variations in condenser filter manufacturers or styles is justified.
Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the clarifying language
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR and requiring that any
optional condenser filters be removed during testing into sections
2.2.3.7 of Appendix A and 2.2.5.7 of Appendix B.
h. Security Covers
Manufacturers may offer for sale, with a basic model, optional
straps or other devices to secure the beverage vending machine and
prevent theft or tampering. Because such security devices are not
anticipated to affect the measured energy consumption of refrigerated
beverage vending machines and will likely significantly complicate the
loading and testing of BVM models, in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR,
DOE proposed to clarify that these security devices should be removed
during testing under the DOE test procedure. 79 FR at 46922.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the amendments
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding security covers.
Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the proposed clarifying
language in Appendices A and B with no modification into sections
2.2.3.8 and 2.2.5.8 of Appendix A and B, respectively.
i. Coated Coils
Coated coils, generally specified for use in units that will be
subjected to environments in which acids or oxidizers are present, are
treated with an additional coating (such as a layer of epoxy or
polymer) as a barrier to protect the bare metal of the coil from
deterioration and corrosion. DOE believes the existing DOE test
procedure accurately accounts for the performance of all types of
coils, including those with coatings, and that no additional
clarifications are needed in the test procedure.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the discussion in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR regarding coated coils. Therefore, in
this final rule, DOE is not adding any clarifying language to the test
procedure regarding the treatment of coated coils.
j. General Purpose Outlets
Some beverage vending machines may be offered for sale with
integrated general purpose electrical outlets, which may be used to
power additional equipment. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE
proposed adding clarifying language to Appendices A and BB specifying
that no external load should be connected to the general purpose
outlets contained on a unit during testing. 79 FR at 46922.
DOE received one comment during the NOPR public meeting regarding
the treatment of general purpose outlets on beverage vending machines.
NEEA suggested fully energizing the electrical outlet to the full
amount that the circuit is able to handle instead of de-energizing them
to the lowest energy consumption since they are regulated by National
Electric Code. (NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at p. 96) In
response to the comment from NEEA, DOE notes that energizing the
general purpose outlet to the maximum energy consumption may give an
estimation of the maximum energy consumption of the beverage vending
machine, but fully energizing the general purpose outlet is not
necessarily representative of the energy consumption of any such
beverage vending machine in the field. Due to the lack of information
regarding the extent to which general purpose outlets on beverage
vending machines are used in the field and their representative
incremental energy consumption on beverage vending machines equipped
with such devices, DOE is unable to determine a representative test
procedure or load profile for general purpose outlets. Therefore, DOE
is clarifying in sections 2.2.3.9 of Appendix A and 2.2.5.9 of Appendix
B that no external load should be connected to the general purpose
outlets contained on a unit in this final rule, as proposed in the 2014
BVM test procedure NOPR.
[[Page 45782]]
k. Crankcase Heaters and Electric Resistance Heaters for Cold Weather
Some BVM models feature crankcase heaters or electric resistance
heaters designed to keep the compressor warm in order to maintain the
refrigerant at optimal conditions or to prevent freezing of beverages
contained in the unit when the unit is operating at extremely low
ambient temperatures. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed
to clarify that, if present, crankcase heaters and other electric
resistance heaters for cold weather should be operational during the
test. DOE also proposed that, if a control system, such as a thermostat
or electronic controller, is used to modulate the operation of the
heater, it should be used as intended per the manufacturer's
instructions. 79 FR at 46922.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the proposed
clarification that crankcase heaters and electric resistance heaters
for cold weather, if present, should be operational during the test
and, if controlled, should be controlled in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is
adopting the clarifying provisions as sections 2.2.3.10 and 2.2.5.10 of
Appendix A and B, respectively, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR.
B. Appendix B: Summary of the Test Procedure Revisions to Account for
Low Power Modes
In this final rule, DOE is also updating the DOE test procedure for
beverage vending machines, to include in a new Appendix B to 10 CFR
part 431, subpart Q, which is to be used to demonstrate compliance with
any new or amended standards established as a result of the associated
ongoing energy conservation standards rulemaking. (Docket No. EERE-
2013-BT-STD-0022) This new Appendix B includes all of the amendments in
Appendix A and, in addition, provisions for testing low power modes.
Many beverage vending machines are equipped with low power modes
designed to be used during periods when demand for refrigerated
beverages is low and there is opportunity to reduce equipment energy
use without greatly affecting consumer utility. The features of these
modes may include (but are not limited to) dimming or switching off
lights, and raising the temperature set point (to which the unit cools
the product) to a value higher than the temperature set point
associated with the unit's vending mode.
BVM low power modes are typically activated during periods when
customer traffic is known or anticipated to be minimal or nonexistent
(such as at night or when a facility is closed), though they may also
be activated based on short-term historical vend patterns or after a
specified length of inactivity. Some low power modes may operate on
fixed schedules, while others may operate based on sensor input such as
that from a motion sensor or customer interface on the machine.
Individual machines may have multiple low power modes, such as a
schedule-based low power mode allowing the refrigeration system to shut
off during periods when customers are not available and an activity-
based low power mode during vending periods that dims the lights when
customer activity is not detected after a certain length of time.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, the test method incorporated by
reference in the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule, and ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2010, the test method DOE is incorporating by reference
in this final rule, both require that the vending machine be ``operated
with normal lighting and control settings, using only those energy
management controls that are permanently operational and not capable of
being adjusted by a machine operator.'' (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004
7.1.1(d)) These test methods do not capture the widely available user-
adjustable low power modes of operation in a representative manner, and
manufacturers that offer this functionality are not able to reflect the
increased efficiency of their units under either of these test methods.
Additionally, these test methods do not specify how to test equipment
that has permanently operational controls (meaning those that cannot be
disabled).)
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed amendments to the
BVM test procedure to provide clear and consistent provisions for
testing beverage vending machines equipped with low power modes as well
as to indicate what settings would be required to be used for the
testing of machines with energy management controls that are
permanently operational (meaning those that cannot be disabled), but
can be adjusted by the operator. 79 FR 46908, 46923-46927 (Aug. 11,
2014). DOE received comments on those proposals in the 2014 NOPR public
meeting and during the written comment period following publication of
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR in the Federal Register. Id.
This section summarizes DOE's specific proposals regarding the
treatment of low power modes in the BVM test procedure, any comments
received regarding those proposals, DOE's response to comments
received, and the revisions to the test procedure related to low power
modes that are included in sections 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2 of
Appendix B. Specifically, sections III.B.1, III.B.2, and III.B.3
discuss definitions related to the low power mode test procedure, DOE's
adopted test method for accounting for low power modes of operation,
and the refrigeration low power mode verification test, respectively.
1. Definitions Related to the Low Power Mode Test Procedure
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to allow
manufacturers of equipment with a low power mode to enable features
associated with that mode during a fixed period of time during the BVM
test procedure. DOE defined ``low power mode'' as a state in which a
BVM's lighting, refrigeration, and/or other energy-using systems are
automatically adjusted (without user intervention) such that they
consume less energy than they consume in an active vending environment
when the beverage vending machine is capable of dispensing sealed
beverages at the intended vending temperature (typically 36 [deg]F
1 [deg]F). 79 FR at 46924.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE also noted that it might
be beneficial to differentiate between low power modes that affect the
refrigeration system and allow the cabinet temperature to increase
during a specified period and those that affect other energy-consuming
accessories, such as lighting, display signage, or vending equipment.
As such, DOE proposed to separately define ``refrigeration low power
mode'' and ``accessory low power mode.'' DOE proposed to define
refrigeration system low power mode as a state in which a beverage
vending machine's refrigeration system is in low power mode and the
average next-to-vend temperature is automatically (without user
intervention) increased to 40 [deg]F or higher for at least 1 hour. DOE
proposed to define ``accessory low power mode'' as a state in which a
beverage vending machine's lighting and/or other non-refrigeration
energy using systems are in low power mode, which may include, but is
not limited to, dimming or turning off lights or display signage, but
which does not include adjustment of the refrigeration system. Id.
[[Page 45783]]
NEEA and SVA supported DOE's proposed definition of low power mode.
(NEEA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0004 at pp. 147-148; SVA, No.
0008 at p. 3) Regarding DOE's proposed definition of ``refrigeration
low power mode,'' SVA noted that refrigeration low power modes can
vary, and therefore need to be broadly included in DOE's definition,
specifically objecting to the clause ``without user intervention,'' if
such was intended to include the initial programming of software
parameters that allow the refrigeration low power mode to be enabled.
SVA offered that various methods can be used to achieve the same
outcome of reduced energy consumption resulting from variations in
refrigeration system operation (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Coca-Cola
commented that the refrigeration low power mode should not be
micromanaged and that refrigeration low power modes could include
cycling the evaporator fan or temporarily defeating the defrost cycles.
(Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 9)
In response to DOE's request for comment on the proposed definition
of ``standby,'' (see section III.A.11.c), Coca-Cola commented that DOE
should consider an alternative definition that DOE believes is
applicable to DOE's proposed definition of low power mode. (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 8) Specifically, Coca-Cola suggested the following
definition for standby mode for beverage vending machines: ``Standby
mode is the state that the vending machine is in when it does not have
to deliver product, is not intended to deliver product, or cannot be
used to select and purchase a product. In this mode of operation any
powered element can be in a different state than when the machine is in
normal operation delivering product to a consumer. Standby mode can be
activated automatically by programming or by sensory devices monitoring
internal functions or external conditions and activity.'' (Coca-Cola,
No. 0010 at p. 8) While DOE's standby mode definition is only
applicable to external customer display signs, lights, and digital
screens, DOE believes Coca-Cola's comments are also pertinent to how
DOE defines low power mode for beverage vending machines. As such, DOE
also considered these comments with respect to the ``low power mode''
definition proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR.
DOE appreciates the interested parties' support regarding the
inclusion of definitions of ``low power mode,'' ``accessory low power
mode,'' and ``refrigeration low power mode'' in the test procedure. In
response to Coca-Cola and SVA's comments regarding the definition of
``refrigeration low power mode,'' DOE acknowledges that theoretically,
there are many mechanisms and control approaches to adjusting the
refrigeration system to achieve energy savings during extended periods
of inactivity. However, DOE must balance the desire for flexibility in
the ``refrigeration low power mode'' definition with the need to have
any such ``refrigeration low power mode'' be verifiable. As such, DOE
has designed the ``refrigeration low power mode'' definition to, as
much as possible, be focused on what a ``refrigeration low power mode''
is intended to achieve, namely, energy savings resulting from the
elevation of the refrigerated cabinet temperature when the beverage
vending machine is not in an active vending environment. Therefore, the
``refrigeration low power mode'' definition is intended to be broadly
applicable to any type of control that achieves the desired effect.
However, DOE must be able to quantifiably confirm the presence of any
refrigeration low power mode to prevent manufacturers from being able
to claim the energy savings associated with the existence of a
refrigeration low power mode when the beverage vending machine does
not, in fact, include such a feature. Thus, DOE defined the
refrigeration low power mode to reference a quantifiable temperature
threshold and time interval, to ensure that the existence of a
refrigeration low power mode could be quantifiably determined through a
test. See section III.B.3 for a more in-depth discussion of DOE's
specific refrigeration low power mode verification test method. As
mentioned above, DOE acknowledges that there may be some types of
refrigeration low power mode controls that are not effectively captured
by DOE's proposed refrigeration low power mode verification test and,
in such a case, the manufacturer of such equipment should submit a
petition for a test procedure waiver in accordance with the provisions
in 10 CFR 431.401.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ DOE issued a final rule amending its regulations governing
petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. 79 FR
26591 (May 9, 2014). This final rule became effective on June 9,
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Coca-Cola's comment regarding cycling the evaporator
fan or temporarily defeating the defrost cycles as a type of
refrigeration low power mode, DOE notes that such controls are only low
power modes to the extent that they are activated when the beverage
vending machine is not intended to be actively vending, which is
consistent with DOE's definition of low power mode. If a beverage
vending machine contains controls on the evaporator fan or other
systems that do not meet the definition of low power mode and are not
adjustable by the machine operator, such controls can be employed for
the duration of the test procedure, provided their operation maintains
the primary functionality of the beverage vending machine and is not
inconsistent with the specifications of section III.A.11. If such
controls do meet the definition of a low power mode, they would be
treated as an accessory low power mode, and could be enabled and tested
during the low power mode period. Although evaporator and condenser fan
motor controls and defrost controls do affect the refrigeration system,
they are not treated as refrigeration system low power modes unless
they adjust cabinet temperature. To clarify this, DOE is modifying the
definition of refrigeration low power mode to more specifically explain
that a refrigeration low power mode is any state in which a beverage
vending machine's refrigeration system is in low power mode by raising
the cabinet temperature. Additionally, DOE is modifying the definition
of accessory low power mode to clarify that any control system that
meets the definition of a low power mode and is not a refrigeration low
power mode qualifies as an accessory low power mode.
In response to Coca-Cola's comments regarding the definition of
``standby mode,'' which DOE determined were potentially also applicable
to DOE's definition of ``low power mode,'' DOE believes that Coca-
Cola's suggestions are consistent with DOE's definition of ``low power
mode'' for beverage vending machines. Specifically, DOE believes that
Coca-Cola's suggested language--``any powered element can be in a
different state than when the machine is in normal operation delivering
product to a consumer''--is consistent with DOE's definition, which
specifies that, in low power mode, a beverage vending machine's
lighting, refrigeration, and/or other energy-using systems are
automatically adjusted (without user intervention) such that they
consume less energy than they consume in an active vending environment.
Coca-Cola's more specific language regarding how such modes may be
activated provides useful examples of control methods, all of which are
recognized under DOE's ``low power mode'' definition. However, DOE
believes that the proposed definition is more flexible and more broadly
applicable, since it does not prescribe specific control methods or
specific features that must
[[Page 45784]]
be disabled. As Coca-Cola's suggestions are not substantively different
than DOE's proposed definition for ``low power mode,'' DOE is adopting
the proposed definition without modification.
DOE also notes that ``low power mode'' as defined in this final
rule is different from EPCA's definition of ``standby mode.'' Regarding
the applicability of ``standby mode'' to beverage vending machines in
general, DOE reviewed the operating modes available for beverage
vending machines and determined that this equipment does not have
operating modes that meet the definition of standby mode or off mode,
as established at 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3). Specifically, beverage vending
machines are typically providing at least one main function--
refrigeration. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)) DOE recognizes that in a
unique equipment design, the low power mode includes disabling the
refrigeration system, while for other equipment the low power mode
controls only elevate the thermostat set point. Because low power modes
still include some amount of refrigeration for the vast majority of
equipment, DOE believes that such a mode does not constitute a
``standby mode,'' as defined by EPCA, for beverage vending machines.
2. Low Power Mode Test Method
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed to establish a
physical test that consists of a 6-hour low power mode test period that
allows accessory low power modes to be enabled, and a separate
calculation approach to account for refrigeration low power modes. DOE
proposed a calculation-based approach to account for refrigeration low
power modes because DOE believed it was the best method to provide
consistent and equitable treatment among BMV models, and to ensure the
accuracy and repeatability of the test method, without making the test
method unduly burdensome to conduct. 79 FR at 46924-46926.
Under DOE's proposed method, equipment with a low power mode would
stabilize and operate under normal test procedure conditions, with all
equipment and accessories energized as they would be when the equipment
is capable of actively refrigerating and vending sealed beverages (as
specified in section III.A.11), for the first 18 hours of the test
period. During this ``active vending'' test period, DOE proposed that
any low power modes be disabled and, unless specified otherwise by
another portion of the test procedure, that all low power mode control
features that cannot be disabled but can be adjusted would be required
to be adjusted such that the DEC is maximized, to best represent the
likely performance of the equipment in the field while in active
vending mode. Similarly, DOE proposed adopting a modification to ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1, requiring that any party performing the test
procedure provide, if necessary, any physical stimuli or other input to
the machine that may be needed to prevent automatic activation of low
power modes during the vending state test period. Id.
Then, for equipment with an accessory low power mode, DOE proposed
that the accessory low power mode may be enabled for the final 6 hours
of the test, or from hour 18 to hour 24 of the 24-hour test. 79 FR at
46926. For equipment with multiple accessory low power modes or
multiple energy use states, DOE clarified that equipment should be
configured with the lowest energy-consuming lighting and control
settings during the accessory low power mode test period. 79 FR at
46927. Equipment without an accessory low power mode would continue to
operate normally and in accordance with specifications in the DOE test
procedure. DOE proposed 6 -hours as a representative length of time for
the low power mode test period, based on the fact that it is intended
to represent off hours between periods of vending when the facility may
be closed or have low occupancy. While DOE recognizes that there is a
wide range of types of low power mode controls and time periods for
which these controls are enabled, DOE believes a timeframe of 6 hours
is a reasonable representation of average field use. 79 FR at 46926.
To account for the energy savings associated with the presence of
any refrigeration low power modes, DOE proposed using a calculation-
based energy credit equal to 3 percent of the measured DEC of any unit
equipped with a refrigeration low power mode. Id. DOE developed the 3
percent value based upon test data evaluating the low power mode energy
savings for a variety of different BVM models available on the market.
DOE developed the credit to represent the approximate energy savings
that would have been achieved through a 6-hour time period during which
the refrigeration low power mode of the tested unit was enabled,
including any time and energy consumption necessary to return the case
to appropriate vending temperature within the 6-hour period. The method
DOE used to develop this value is described in detail in the BVM test
procedure NOPR. 79 FR at 46925-46926.
In response to DOE's proposed low power mode test provisions, DOE
received a number of comments from interested parties. AMS supported
DOE's proposed low power mode test method, but noted that
characteristics of the low power mode were account driven and depended
on what customers wanted. (AMS, No. 0007 at pp. 7-8) Coca-Cola agreed
with AMS that the low power mode is dependent on many factors and is
primarily account-driven and they noted that a test-procedure should
not define or limit how energy savings are achieved. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 9) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and SVA supported DOE's view regarding
the responsibility of the testing entity to provide the necessary
stimuli to prevent automatic activation of low power modes during the
vending state test procedure. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4; SVA,
No. 0008 at p. 3) However, SVA stated that the inclusion of low power
modes in the test procedure would be overly burdensome to manufacturers
and would make it difficult to compare results. SVA added that these
features are present on most, if not all, beverage vending machines and
SVA did not support giving manufacturers an option to reduce the
publicized DEC value without actually changing anything of substance.
(SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3)
Regarding DOE's proposed calculation-based method to account for
refrigeration low power modes, NEEA and SVA supported DOE's proposal to
provide a percentage credit to machines with a refrigeration low power
mode. (NEEA, No. 0009 at p.2; SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Conversely, ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, Coca-Cola, California IOUs, and AMS commented that a physical
test would be the most accurate method to account for low power mode
operation and expressed concern about the 3 percent savings credit for
refrigeration data low power mode. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4;
Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 10; CA IOUs, No. 0005 at p. 2; AMS, No. 0007
at pp. 7-8) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 stated that the committee is currently
working to specify a physical refrigeration low power mode test
protocol that would be applicable to all BVM operating schemes. (ASHRAE
SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at p. 4) Coca-Cola submitted that it was acceptable
to separate low power mode for refrigeration systems from low power
mode for other machine functions, since the former is tied to food
safety. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 9)
Regarding the length of the low power mode test period, Coca-Cola
supported
[[Page 45785]]
DOE's proposal of a 6-hour low power mode test period. (Coca-Cola, No.
0010 at p. 9) ASHRAE SPC 32.1 noted that the committee was considering
alternative time periods for the low power mode test period, and was in
the process of researching available field data to determine what would
be most appropriate and representative. (ASHRAE SPC 32.1, No. 0011 at
p. 4)
DOE appreciates comments from interested parties expressing support
for DOE's low power mode test method. DOE agrees with interested
parties that there are a wide variety of low power mode controls and
approaches. DOE has attempted to define ``low power mode,'' ``accessory
low power mode,'' ``refrigeration low power mode,'' and the associated
test methods to be technology-neutral, to the extent possible.
Specifically, DOE designed the definitions of ``low power mode,''
``accessory low power mode,'' and ``refrigeration low power mode'' to
focus on the intended outcome of the low power mode, namely energy
savings during periods of inactivity, rather than the specific
mechanism by which such energy savings are accomplished, as discussed
in section III.B.1. DOE also notes that employing a physical accessory
low power mode test allows any control that meets DOE's definition of
accessory low power mode to be enabled during the 6-hour low power mode
test period, and the energy savings from any such accessory low power
mode to be objectively determined. Because DOE did not employ a
physical test, when defining ``refrigeration low power mode,'' DOE had
to be more cognizant of the specific characteristics that constituted a
refrigeration low power mode to ensure that the 3 percent credit would
be applicable and to ensure that the presence of a low power mode was
verifiable, as discussed further in section III.B.3.
In response to SVA's comment regarding the additional burden
associated with accounting for the impact of low power modes in the DOE
test procedure, DOE believes that including a method to quantify the
energy impact of low power modes is important to ensure that the test
is representative of the energy consumption of the equipment, since, as
SVA notes, low power modes are a common feature on many beverage
vending machines. In addition, DOE considered repeatability and the
burden of testing when developing the low power mode test method, and
believes the proposed test method represents very little additional
burden while providing a fair and accurate comparison of BVM
performance. Specifically, DOE is adopting a calculation-based approach
to account for the impact of any refrigeration low power mode because
it is the least burdensome and most repeatable approach.
However, as noted in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, non-
refrigeration based accessory low power modes are more straightforward
to evaluate based on a physical test. Therefore, as a physical test
will more accurately capture the energy impact of any accessory low
power modes, DOE believes that a physical test is warranted in this
case. Physical testing of accessory low power modes will also allow for
differentiation and performance comparisons among different BVM models
equipped with different accessory low power modes, whereas a
calculation-based approach may not. DOE notes that the accessory low
power mode test will not add to the length of the test, and only
requires the interaction of test personnel to program the low power
mode controls, which DOE believes will not significantly impact the
burden associated with conducting the DOE test procedure. DOE
specifically quantifies the burden associated with the low power mode
test provisions, as well as all the test procedure amendments adopted
in this final rule, in section IV.B.
Regarding the repeatability of the accessory low power mode test
method, DOE acknowledges comments from interested parties that
accessory low power modes may employ a variety of different control
strategies and control a variety of different components. While DOE
believes that it is important to preserve flexibility to accommodate
various types of accessory low power mode controls in the DOE test
procedure, DOE understands that this could impact the repeatability of
the test if it is not clear which control settings should be employed
for testing. Therefore, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure
NOPR, DOE is adopting provisions in this final rule that beverage
vending machines with multiple accessory low power modes must be placed
in the accessory low power mode that results in the maximum energy
savings.
DOE appreciates the comments from ASHRAE SPC 32.1, Coca-Cola,
California IOUs, and AMS regarding a desire for a physical test for the
refrigeration low power mode. DOE agrees with commenters that a
physical test would be more accurate for a specific tested BVM unit and
would allow for better differentiation of the performance of different
types of refrigeration low power mode controls. However, as noted in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE understands that refrigeration
low power modes are extremely variable in terms of their control
strategies and operation and, in addition, may require specific
instructions from the manufacturer to precisely modify or adjust the
control systems to accommodate the specific provisions of the DOE test
procedure. 79 FR at 46924-46925. DOE believes that this would reduce
the consistency and repeatability of such a physical test method and
would make the method impractical to implement. Therefore, due to the
difficulty of accounting for the wide variety of refrigeration low
power modes in a consistent, fair, and reasonable manner, DOE is
electing to adopt a calculation-based refrigeration low power mode
credit, as proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR. The
refrigeration low power mode credit was calculated based on the
physical testing of several BVM units, with and without the
refrigeration low power mode employed, and including the energy
consumption of the refrigeration system and all lights and accessories
available on the tested units. Based on these test data, DOE determined
the average reduction in measured DEC resulting from use of the
refrigeration low power mode only. DOE notes that, with regard to the
calculation-based provisions for determining the DEC when testing is
conducted without a payment mechanism, the refrigeration low power mode
credit would be applied to the calculated DEC, determined as the sum of
the tested primary energy consumption and the default payment mechanism
energy consumption value. Whether using the testing-based or
calculation-based provisions for determining the DEC (with or without a
payment mechanism installed, respectively), the refrigeration low power
mode credit is applied to the total energy consumption of the machine,
including all accessories and refrigeration system components.
DOE also appreciates the comments of ASHRAE SPC 32.1 regarding
their work on developing a physical testing-based refrigeration low
power mode test method that would be universally applicable to all
systems. However, DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 did not provide any
additional information regarding the specific test provisions they are
considering. DOE also notes that DOE has been following the work of
ASHRAE SPC 32.1 and is not aware of any discussions proposing or
finalizing a refrigeration low power mode test method at this time.
While
[[Page 45786]]
the work of ASHRAE SPC 32.1 is ongoing, to DOE's knowledge, a
repeatable and consistent physical refrigeration low power mode test is
not available at this time and, as such, DOE is adopting the
refrigeration low power mode credit proposed in the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR.
With regard to the comments from interested parties regarding the
3-percent credit for beverage vending machines with refrigeration low
power mode capability, DOE acknowledges the concerns of some commenters
that 3 percent may not accurately describe the specific energy savings
from a unique instance of a refrigeration low power mode. However,
DOE's estimate of 3 percent energy savings due to the operation of low
power modes is based on the data available and known to DOE, and DOE
notes that interested parties did not submit additional data to inform
this estimate. DOE understands that the control strategies employed by
various refrigeration low power modes could result in variation in the
achieved energy savings, even assuming they are evaluated according to
a consistent test method. However, DOE reiterates that the proposed 3-
percent credit is determined based on low power mode test results of
BVM models with different low power modes \13\ and, as such, DOE
believes 3-percent is representative of the common types of
refrigeration low power modes DOE has observed in the market place.
Therefore, DOE is maintaining the 3-percent energy savings credit
proposed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR for beverage vending
machines with a refrigeration low power mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ DOE described the method for determining the 3 percent
credit in detail in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR. 79 FR 46908,
46925-46926 (Aug. 11, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to the length of the low power mode test period, DOE
appreciates Coca-Cola's support of the 6-hour low power mode test
duration. DOE also appreciates ASHRAE SPC 32.1's comment that they were
considering alternative time periods for the low power mode test period
and were in the process of researching available field data to
determine what would be most appropriate and representative. However,
DOE notes that ASHRAE SPC 32.1 did not submit any additional data
regarding BVM low power mode usage profiles or durations. Lacking any
additional data or more specific recommendations, DOE is maintaining
the low power mode test duration at 6 hours as proposed in the 2014 BVM
test procedure NOPR.
DOE believes the accessory and refrigeration low power mode test
provisions are applicable to most forms of low power modes available in
the marketplace. However, DOE is aware of some forms of ``learning-
based'' energy management controls that cannot be accurately or
consistently captured by the DOE test procedure for beverage vending
machines. Such energy management controls save energy by, over time,
using historic sales and traffic data and embedded algorithms to
profile and predict typical times of high and low traffic and sales
based on the sales history of the machine. However, it is extremely
difficult to develop a repeatable procedure to evaluate the energy
savings from such controls over a 24-hour test in a testing laboratory.
As such, DOE acknowledges that such energy management controls would
not be effectively captured over the course of the DOE test procedure
and, as such, should be disabled during the test, if possible. If such
``learning-based'' controls also have a ``schedule-based'' or
programmable mode, the energy management controls can be operated in
the programmed mode in accordance with the accessory low power mode
provisions. If the controls do not have a programmable mode and cannot
be disabled during the test, or the energy management control
provisions are otherwise inapplicable, the manufacturer of that
equipment should submit a petition for request a waiver in accordance
with the provisions in 10 CFR 431.401.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ DOE issued a final rule amending its regulations governing
petitions for waiver and interim waiver from DOE test procedures for
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. 79 FR
26591 (May 9, 2014). This final rule became effective on June 9,
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Refrigeration Low Power Mode Verification Test Protocol
DOE recognizes that a calculated energy credit will not account for
differences in performance or efficacy among different types of
refrigeration low power modes and will not objectively verify the
performance or existence of a refrigerated low power mode. Therefore, a
procedure to verify the existence of a refrigeration low power mode, as
defined, is required to ensure BVM manufacturers do not apply the 3-
percent refrigeration low power mode credit to basic models that have a
refrigeration low power mode that will not result in energy savings in
the field.
In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE proposed a refrigeration
low power mode verification test method, which included initiating the
refrigeration low power mode after completion of the 24-hour BVM test
period and recording the average temperature of the standard test
packages in the next-to-vend beverage positions for the next 2 hours.
Under DOE's proposal, over the course of this 2-hour period, the
instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperatures (i.e., the
spatial average of all next-to-vend beverages) would be required to
increase above 40[emsp14][deg]F and remain above 40[emsp14][deg]F for
at least 1 hour. DOE also proposed that the beverage vending machine
would be required to be capable of automatically returning itself to
its normal operating conditions, including the specified integrated
average temperature, at the conclusion of the refrigeration low power
mode. To limit unnecessary burden, DOE also proposed that this
validation test would not be required to determine the DEC of BVM
models, but would be employed by DOE for enforcement purposes to verify
the existence of a refrigeration low power mode.
In response to DOE's proposed refrigeration low power mode, SVA
commented that 1 hour might not be a sufficient time span to raise the
temperature of all the next-to-vend packages above 40[emsp14][deg]F.
SVA reasoned that this depended on multiple factors, including
insulation effectiveness. (SVA, No. 0008 at p. 3) Coca-Cola drew DOE's
attention to the FDA Food Code, which recommends that in a refrigerated
vending machine, the air temperature may not exceed 5 [deg]C for more
than 30 minutes immediately after the machine is filled, serviced, or
re-stocked. Because of this, Coca-Cola suggested that it would be
impractical to have a test where a product is maintained over
40[emsp14][deg]F for 1 hour, and that should such a test be conducted,
it should be for information only. (Coca-Cola, No. 0010 at p. 10)
DOE appreciates the comments submitted by SVA that the duration of
the refrigeration low power mode verification test may not be long
enough to reach 40[emsp14][deg]F and agrees that the time it takes the
refrigerated cabinet to reach such a temperature will be dependent on a
number of things, including the insulation effectiveness. DOE based is
original proposed duration of 2 hours on available test data from a
range of BVM models employing low power mode. Based on the BVM models
for which DOE had data, all BVM units had reached a temperature of at
least 40[emsp14][deg]F within 2 hours. However, DOE does not wish to
disincentivize BVM manufacturers from increasing the energy efficiency
of equipment by increasing the insulation level on the refrigerated
compartment, if doing so
[[Page 45787]]
would prevent the case from being able to meet the refrigeration low
power mode verification test. Therefore, DOE is changing the
refrigeration low power mode verification test duration to 6 hours.
That is, in this final rule, DOE is adopting the following provisions
for the refrigeration low power mode test. In order for a manufacturer
to apply the refrigeration low power mode credit to a particular BVM
unit, the BVM unit must either:
A. Satisfy the following three requirements:
(1) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature
must reach at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as applicable,
within 6 hours;
(2) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature
must be maintained at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, for at least 1 hour; and
(3) After the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage
temperature is maintained at or above 4[emsp14][deg]F above the
integrated average temperature or lowest application product
temperature, as applicable, for at least 1 hour, the refrigerated
beverage vending machine must return to the specified integrated
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, automatically without direct physical intervention; or
B. Not activate the compressor for the entire 6 hour period, in
which case the instantaneous average beverage temperature does not have
to reach 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average temperature or
lowest application product temperature, as applicable, but, the
equipment must still automatically return to the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as applicable,
after the 6 hour period without direct physical intervention.
DOE notes that the temperature threshold of at least
4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average temperature, or
40[emsp14][deg]F for most equipment, was selected based on the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's ENERGY STAR[supreg] \15\ Product
Specification for Refrigeration Beverage Vending Machines, Version
3.1,\16\ which requires that qualified beverage vending machines
include either a lighting low power state, refrigeration low power
state, or whole machine low power state. ENERGY STAR further defines
refrigeration low power state as a state in which the average beverage
temperature is allowed to rise to 40[emsp14][deg]F or higher for an
extended period of time. Given its use in other industry standards, DOE
believes it is consistent to reference a similar temperature threshold
when defining refrigeration low power mode in the DOE test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ENERGY STAR is a joint program of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and DOE that establishes a voluntary rating,
certification, and labeling program for highly energy efficient
consumer products and commercial equipment. Information on the
program is available at www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=home.index.
\16\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ENERGY STAR Program
Requirements for Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines--Eligibility
Criteria: Version 3.1. Revised December 2013. https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/specs//private/Vending%20Machines%20Program%20Requirements%20Version%203%201.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Coca-Cola's comment regarding refrigerated beverage
vending machines designed to vend perishable products, DOE notes that
if a beverage vending machine is not equipped with a refrigeration low
power mode because it is designed to vend perishable products, then it
will not be eligible for the refrigeration low power mode credit. As
such, this optional test procedure to verify the existence of a
refrigeration low power mode would not be applicable to such
refrigerated beverage vending machines. The provisions for testing
refrigerated beverage vending machines equipped with a refrigeration
low power mode do not require BVM models to be sold with such a feature
or preclude BVM models from being sold without a refrigeration low
power mode.
Additionally, DOE wishes to mention that, as previously discussed
in the context of operating temperatures, manufacturers should test and
rate their basic models for the purposes of certification using only
those controls with which units of the given basic model is are
distributed in commerce and intended to be used in the field. Moreover,
the use of any control schemes designed solely for the purposes of
conducting the DOE test that are not available on the beverage vending
machine as it is distributed in commerce cannot be used during the
test. If a manufacturer produces a design which it believes should be
qualified for the refrigeration low power mode credit but which cannot
meet the verification requirements as outlined above, the manufacturer
should apply submit a petition for a test procedure waiver for that
basic model in accordance with the provisions in 10 CFR 431.401, as
noted above in section III.B.2.
C. Other Amendments and Clarifications
DOE is also amending 10 CFR 429.52(b) to clarify the reporting
requirements at 10 CFR 429.52(b). Similarly, DOE is amending the
introductory language found in 10 CFR 431.296 to clarify the
applicability of the DEC measured in accordance with the test procedure
to the energy conservation standards listed in that section.
In this section, DOE discusses DOE's proposed amendments regarding
the certification and reporting requirements for beverage vending
machines, comments DOE received on these issues, DOE's response to any
comments received, and the final amendments being adopted as part of
this final rule. In section III.C.1, DOE also discusses comments
received that are not related to any of the specific test procedure
amendments.
1. Clarifications to the Scope of the BVM Regulations
In written comments received in response to the 2014 BVM test
procedure NOPR, AMS stated that vending machines that do not dispense
beverages should be completely excluded from the scope of this
rulemaking. (AMS, No. 0007 at p. 4)
In response to AMS's comment, DOE notes that all equipment meeting
the definition of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine established by EPCA are subject to DOE's regulations, including
the DOE test procedure and applicable energy conservation standards.
Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine is defined as
``a commercial refrigerator that cools bottled or canned beverages and
dispenses the bottled or canned beverages on payment.'' 10 CFR 431.292
To explicitly include any beverage vending machines that may vend
cooled beverages that are in unusual containers, DOE also defines
``bottled or canned beverage'' as ``a beverage in a sealed container.''
Therefore, as noted by AMS, vending machines that do not cool or
dispense beverages in sealed containers do not meet the definition of a
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine and, as such,
are not subject to DOE's regulations for refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines.
2. Clarifications to Certification and Reporting Requirements
DOE notes that 10 CFR 429.52(b)(2) contains requirements for
certification reports for covered beverage vending
[[Page 45788]]
machines. Specifically, DOE requires reporting of ``maximum average
daily energy consumption.'' However, the outcome of the DOE test
procedure is the measured ``daily energy consumption'' for a given
model of beverage vending machine. To be consistent, DOE proposed in
the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR to update the reporting requirements
at 10 CFR 429.52(b)(2) to require certification reports to include
``daily energy consumption'' rather than ``maximum average daily energy
consumption.'' 79 FR at 46927.
The ``daily energy consumption'' of a given BVM basic model
measured using the DOE test procedure and reported in accordance with
10 CFR 429.52(b)(2) should be compared to the ``maximum daily energy
consumption'' for the basic model's respective equipment class in the
standard table in 10 CFR 431.296 to determine whether the basic model
complies with the relevant standard. To clarify the relationship
between these terms, DOE also proposed to update the language at 10 CFR
431.296 to specify that the ``daily energy consumption'' (rather than
the ``maximum daily energy consumption'') of each basic model of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine must not exceed
the ``maximum daily energy consumption'' specified in the energy
conservation standard table. Id.
DOE did not receive any comments on the proposed amendments to 10
CFR 429.52(b) with regards to reporting requirements for beverage
vending machines, or the introductory language found in 10 CFR 431.296
to clarify the applicability of the DEC measured in accordance with the
test procedure to the energy conservation standards listed in that
section. Therefore, DOE is adopting the proposed clarifications
discussed in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR with no modifications.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this
action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the OMB.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IFRA) for
any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the
agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), DOE
published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that
the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly
considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General
Counsel's Web site: https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
DOE reviewed the proposed rule, which would amend the test
procedure for beverage vending machines, under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. In the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR, DOE certified
that the proposed rule, if adopted, would not result in a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. DOE did not receive
comments on the economic impacts of the test procedure. Therefore, DOE
continues to certify that the test procedure amendments set forth in
this final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The factual basis for this certification is
set forth below.
For the BVM manufacturing industry, the Small Business
Administration (SBA) has set a size threshold, which defines those
entities classified as ``small businesses'' for the purpose of the
statute. DOE used the SBA's size standards to determine whether any
small entities would be required to comply with the rule. The size
standards are codified at 13 CFR part 121. The size standards are
listed by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
code and industry description, and are available at www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf. In the 2007 version of
the NAICS codes, BVM manufacturers were classified under NAICS 333311,
``Automatic Vending Machine Manufacturing.'' The SBA set a threshold of
500 employees or less for an entity to be considered as a small
business for this category. The 2011 Certification, Compliance, &
Enforcement final rule (herein referred to as 2011 CC&E final rule)
indicates that the NAICS code associated with beverage vending machines
was 333311 and the small business threshold was 500 employees as of the
date of that final rule 76 FR 12422, 12448 (March 7, 2011). In 2012,
NAICS published an updated set of codes that contained some significant
changes in the classification of various manufacturing industries from
those established in 2007 and referenced in the CC&E final rule,
including consolidating manufacturers that were previously classified
under 333311 to NAICS code 333318. 77 FR 49991, 50000 (Aug. 20, 2012).
As prescribed by the 2012 NAICS code updates, in this final rule (as
well as in the 2014 BVM test procedure NOPR) DOE has referenced the
2012 NAICS code 333318, ``Other Commercial and Service Industry
Machinery Manufacturing,'' as applicable to BVM manufacturers. The SBA
sets a threshold of 1,000 employees or less for an entity to be
considered as a small business for this category.
DOE conducted a market survey of manufacturers of equipment covered
by this rulemaking using all available public information. DOE's
research involved the review of individual company Web sites and
marketing research tools (e.g., Dun and Bradstreet reports, Manta) to
create a list of companies that manufacture or sell beverage vending
machines covered by this rulemaking. Using these sources, DOE
identified eight manufacturers of beverage vending machines.
DOE then reviewed the data to determine whether the entities met
the SBA's definition of a small business manufacturer of beverage
vending machines and screened out companies that do not offer equipment
covered by this rulemaking, do not meet the definition of a ``small
business,'' or are foreign owned and operated. Based on this review,
DOE has identified four companies that would be considered small
manufacturers; this represents 50 percent of the national BVM
manufacturers.
Table IV.1 groups the small businesses according to their number of
employees. The smallest company has 2 employees and the largest company
has 375 employees. According to DOE's analysis, total annual revenues
associated with these small manufacturers were estimated at $108.5
million ($27.1 million average annual revenue per small manufacturer).
[[Page 45789]]
Table IV.1--Small Business Size by Number of Employees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percentage of
Number of employees small small Cumulative
businesses businesses percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-50............................................................ 1 25.0 25.0
51-100.......................................................... 1 25.0 50.0
101-1000........................................................ 2 50.0 100.0
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 4 .............. ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The total annual revenue for all small business is calculated as the average annual revenue per small business
in each employee size bin multiplied by the number of small businesses in that bin. Note, the value in the
total value may not correspond directly to the average data due to rounding.
This final rule updates and incorporates several additional
amendments to clarify ambiguities in the industry test procedure
incorporated by reference into the DOE test procedure for beverage
vending machines. In addition, DOE is incorporating revisions to the
DOE test procedure that:
(1) Eliminate testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test
condition,
(2) clarify the test procedure for combination vending machines,
(3) clarify the requirements for loading BVM models under the DOE
test procedure,
(4) clarify the specifications of the test package,
(5) clarify the next-to-vend beverage temperature test condition,
(6) specify placement of thermocouples during the DOE test
procedure,
(7) establish testing provisions at the lowest application product
temperature,
(8) clarify the treatment of certain accessories when conducting
the DOE test procedure, and
(9) add a method to account for energy impacts of low power modes.
Manufacturers are currently required to test Class A and Class B
beverage vending machines using the DOE test procedure established in
the 2006 BVM test procedure final rule (71 FR 71340; Dec. 8, 2006) to
show compliance with existing energy conservation standards established
in the 2009 BVM energy conservation standard final rule (74 FR 44914;
Aug. 31, 2009). That test procedure incorporates by reference ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 and ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004, and consists of one
24-hour test at standard rating conditions to determine the DEC of
covered beverage vending machines during a representative cycle of use.
71 FR 71340, 71355 (Dec. 8, 2006). DOE estimates the cost of conducting
the DOE current test procedure to be $5,000 for each BVM unit for the
24-hour test.
Six of the amendments in this test procedure final rule will not
change the testing burden for refrigerated beverage vending machines.
These amendments serve only to establish new definitions and provide
clarification to DOE's existing test procedure requirements. As
discussed in section III.A.1 of this final rule, updating the reference
to an industry test procedure and other minor clarifications of the
referenced industry test procedure will not change the test procedure
burden because it will not change the technical requirements of the
test procedure. Other amendments that do not change the testing burden
for refrigerated beverage vending machines include the amendments
regarding the test procedure for combination vending machines, loading
the vending machines when conducting the test procedure, specifying the
characteristics of the test package, clarifying the next-to-vend
temperature test condition, and specifying the placement of
thermocouples during testing.
The remaining amendments in this test procedure rule may affect the
test procedure burden and the expected incremental increases or
decreases in cost for conducting the test procedure are discussed in
the following paragraphs.
DOE estimated the cost of labor using an average hourly salary of
$42.65 for an engineer.\17\ Including fringe benefits, which are
estimated to be 30 percent of total compensation, the total hourly cost
to an employer is estimated to be $55.45.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2014.
National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. Washington, DC.
Available at www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#17-0000.
\18\ U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2014.
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation--Management, Professional,
and Related Employees. Washington, DC. Available at: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminating testing at the 90[emsp14][deg]F ambient test condition
will substantially lessen the testing burden on manufacturers, as it
decreases the testing requirements from two tests to one test per BVM
unit. DOE estimates this decrease in burden to be 10 hours of labor and
60 hours of facility use, which reduces the testing cost for each BVM
unit by roughly $2,500, or half the cost of conducting the existing
test procedure.
Establishing testing provisions at the lowest application product
temperature affects only a very small percentage of equipment on the
market, estimated to be less than 2 percent of shipments. Manufacturers
who make equipment affected by this provision should experience a
decrease in burden because they will no longer have to seek waivers for
equipment that cannot maintain the 36[emsp14][deg]F 1[deg]F
average next-to-vend temperature for the duration of the test. For
these manufacturers, DOE estimates this will save 4 hours of labor to
develop an alternate test procedure and submit the waiver application
for each beverage vending machine basic model, or $221.80 for each
beverage vending machine basic model.
Clarifying the treatment of various components and accessories in
the DOE test procedure should not alter the technical requirements of
the DOE test procedure, because these additional specifications are
meant to clarify existing requirements. However, DOE understands that
the treatment of some of these accessories and components may have been
inconsistent due to the lack of clarity or misinterpretation of the DOE
test procedure. Therefore, DOE is accounting for the incremental burden
associated with properly configuring BVM models for testing in
accordance with these clarified component specifications. The specific
clarifications pertain to money processing devices, interior lighting,
external displays and screens, anti-sweat heaters, condensate pan
heaters and pumps, illuminated temperature displays, condenser filters,
security covers, coated coils, general purpose outlets, and crankcase
heaters and electric resistance heaters for cold weather. The
adjustments to these accessories will require additional attention by
the engineers conducting the test. DOE estimates the additional cost to
be $110.90 for each model tested based on 1 hour of an engineer's time
[[Page 45790]]
to make all the applicable adjustments to the components and
accessories prior to testing and 1 hour of an engineer's time to attend
to the components and accessories of the model during testing.
Amendments in this final rule that expand the testing methodology
to incorporate lighting and control settings to account for low power
modes will require additional attention by test personnel. Regarding
the accessory low power test, DOE estimates it will require 1 hour to
make any necessary adjustments to begin low power mode operation at
that time. During the active vending mode test procedure, DOE estimates
that it will take a maximum of 10 additional hours of an engineer's
time to periodically monitor the operation of the tested unit and
interact with the unit, if necessary to ensure that the unit does not
re-enter a low power mode state. DOE does not believe that multiplying
the DEC by 0.97 to account for refrigeration low power mode will
increase the burden associated with conducting the DOE test procedure.
However, DOE is also proposing an optional refrigeration low power mode
verification test that manufacturers may elect to perform to ensure
their equipment meets the requirements of a refrigeration low power
mode, which would increase the test burden. DOE estimates that this
test would require an additional 4 hours of test time, 2 hours to allow
the refrigeration low power mode to initiate and maintain the adjusted
refrigeration state, and an assumed 2 hours to return to 36 [deg]F
1 [deg]F to verify that the BVM model can automatically
return to vending conditions. DOE estimates the incremental costs
associated with conducting the low power mode test as $609.95 for each
model tested, based on the assumption that it would take an engineer an
additional 11 hours to attend to the tested model. Including the
optional refrigeration low power mode verification test method, the
incremental cost of the low power mode test procedure amendments is
$831.75.
All of the amendments and clarifications in this final rule, taken
together, will result in an overall reduction in burden for small
manufacturers conducting the DOE test procedure, primarily due to the
removal of the requirement to test at the 90 [deg]F ambient condition.
On average, the cost of testing covered beverage vending machines would
be reduced by approximately $1,650 per basic model, or by 34 percent
per small manufacturer, not including the optional tests that are not
required for certification of BVM models. Table IV.2 summarizes the
amendments in this final rule that impact manufacturer burden. However,
note that different test procedure provisions are applicable to
different BVM models and configurations and, as such, the sum of these
provisions does not represent the ``total incremental change in
burden'' for each tested BVM model under the test procedure amendments
adopted in this final rule.
Table IV.2--Summary of Amendments that Impact Manufacturer Burden
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in burden
Provision (per model tested) Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate 90 [deg]F ambient -$2,500............. Reduces half the
test condition. cost of the 2006
BVM test procedure.
Lowest application product -221.80............. 4 hours of
temperature testing (for engineer's time.
certain models).
Treatment of accessories.... 110.90.............. 2 hours of
engineer's time.
Low power mode test......... 609.95.............. 11 hours of
engineer's time.
831.75 (with 15 hours of
optional engineer's time.
refrigeration low
power mode test).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the criteria outlined above, DOE certifies that the test
procedure amendments would not have a ``significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.'' DOE has transmitted the
certification and supporting statement of factual basis to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of beverage vending machines must certify to DOE that
their products comply with any applicable energy conservation
standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their
products according to the DOE test procedure for beverage vending
machines, including any amendments adopted for the test procedure. DOE
has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping
requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial
equipment, including beverage vending machines. (76 FR 12422 (March 7,
2011). DOE recently revised its estimated certification and record
keeping requirements to an average of 30 hours per response, including
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information. 80 FR 5099 (Jan. 30, 2015). The
collection-of-information requirement for the certification and
recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This updated certification requirement
has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910-1400. Id.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this final rule, DOE amends its test procedure for beverage
vending machines. DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class
of actions that are categorically excluded from review under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, this
rule amends an existing rule without affecting the amount, quality or
distribution of energy usage, and, therefore, will not result in any
environmental impacts. Thus, this rulemaking is covered by Categorical
Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, which applies to any
rulemaking that interprets or amends an existing rule without changing
the environmental effect of that rule. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
[[Page 45791]]
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999),
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have Federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR at 13735. DOE examined this final rule and
determined that it will not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
products that are the subject of this final rule. States can petition
DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on
criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is
required by Executive Order 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
this final rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a regulatory action resulting in a rule that may cause the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR at 12820; also
available at https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined
this final rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and
determined that the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate,
nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or
more in any year, so these requirements do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This final rule will not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity
of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it
is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation will not
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has
reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR at
28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit
to OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any significant energy action, the
agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy
supply, distribution, or use if the regulation is implemented, and of
reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
This regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
[[Page 45792]]
of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by
the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy
action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy
Effects.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA)
Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed
rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of
proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of
such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with
the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on
competition.
This rule incorporates testing methods contained in ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 32.1-2010, ``Methods of Testing for Rating Vending Machines
for Sealed Beverages.'' DOE has evaluated this standard and is unable
to conclude whether it fully complies with the requirements of section
32(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act (i.e., whether they were
developed in a manner that fully provides for public participation,
comment, and review).
DOE has consulted with both the Attorney General and the Chairman
of the FTC about the impact on competition of using the methods
contained in this standard and has received no comments objecting to
their use.
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of this rule before its effective date. The report will
state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
N. Description of Standards Incorporated by Reference
In this final rule, DOE is incorporating by reference a method of
test published by ASHRAE and ANSI, titled ``Methods of Testing for
Rating Vending Machines for Sealed Beverages,'' ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
32.1-2010. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010 is an industry-accepted
standard used to specify methods of testing for rating the capacity and
efficiency of self-contained, mechanically refrigerated vending
machines for sealed beverages. The DOE test procedure codified by this
final rule references ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010. Copies of ASHRAE
standards may be purchased from the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers; 1791 Tullie Circle, NE.
Atlanta, GA 30329, 404-636-8400, or www.ashrae.org.
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household
appliances, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Incorporation by reference, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 15, 2015.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and
431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth
below:
PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.
0
2. Section 429.52 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 429.52 Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Pursuant to Sec. 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must
include the following additional public, equipment-specific
information:
(i) When using appendix A of subpart Q of part 431of this chapter,
the daily energy consumption in kilowatt hours per day (kWh/day), the
refrigerated volume (V) in cubic feet (ft\3\), whether testing was
conducted with payment mechanism in place and operational, and, if
applicable, the lowest application product temperature in degrees
Fahrenheit ([deg]F), if applicable.
(ii) When using appendix B of subpart Q of part 431of this chapter,
the daily energy consumption in kilowatt hours per day (kWh/day), the
refrigerated volume (V) in cubic feet (ft\3\), whether testing was
conducted with payment mechanism in place and operational, whether
testing was conducted using an accessory low power mode, whether rating
was based on the presence of a refrigeration low power mode, and, if
applicable, the lowest application product temperature in degrees
Fahrenheit ([deg]F).
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
3. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.
0
4. Section 431.291 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 431.291 Scope.
This subpart specifies test procedures and energy conservation
standards for certain commercial refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines, pursuant to part A of Title III of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309.
The regulatory provisions of Sec. Sec. 430.33 and 430.34 and subparts
D and E of part 430 of this chapter are applicable to refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machines.
0
5. Section 431.292 is amended by revising the definitions of
``Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine'' and ``V''
to read as follows:
Sec. 431.292 Definitions concerning refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines.
* * * * *
Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine means a
commercial refrigerator (as defined at Sec. 431.62) that cools bottled
or canned beverages and dispenses the bottled or canned beverages on
payment.
* * * * *
V means the refrigerated volume (ft\3\) of the refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machine, as measured by Appendix C of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
0
6. Section 431.293 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
[[Page 45793]]
Sec. 431.293 Materials incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(b) ASHRAE. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, 1791 Tullie Circle, NE. Atlanta, GA 30329, 404-
636-8400, or www.ashrae.org.
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2010, (``ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1''),
``Methods of Testing for Rating Vending Machines for Sealed
Beverages,'' approved July 23, 2010, IBR approved for Sec. 431.292 and
appendices A and B to subpart Q of this part.
(2) [Reserved]
0
7. Section 431.294 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 431.294 Uniform test method for the measurement of energy
consumption of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machines.
* * * * *
(b) Testing and Calculations. Determine the daily energy
consumption of each covered refrigerated bottled or canned beverage
vending machine by conducting the appropriate test procedure set forth
in appendix A or B to this subpart.
Sec. 431.296 [Amended]
0
8. Section 431.296 is amended by removing the word ``maximum'' after
``shall have a'' in the introductory text.
0
9. Subpart Q of part 431 is amended by adding appendices A and B to
read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart Q of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Refrigerated Bottled or Canned
Beverage Vending Machines
Note: Prior to January 27, 2016, manufacturers must make any
representations with respect to the energy use or efficiency of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this Appendix A
or the procedures in 10 CFR 431.294 as it appeared in the edition of
10 CFR parts 200 to 499 revised as of January 1, 2015. Any
representations made with respect to the energy use or efficiency of
such refrigerated beverage vending machines must be in accordance
with whichever version is selected. On or after January 27, 2016,
manufacturers must make any representations with respect to energy
use or efficiency in accordance with the results of testing pursuant
to this Appendix A to demonstrate compliance with the energy
conservation standards at 10 CFR 431.296, for which compliance was
required as of August 31, 2012.
1. General. Section 3, ``Definitions''; section 4,
``Instruments''; section 5, ``Vendible Capacity''; section 6, ``Test
Conditions''; section 7.1, ``Test Procedures--General
Requirements''; and section 7.2, ``Energy Consumption Test'' of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 431.293)
apply to this appendix except as noted throughout this appendix. In
cases where there is a conflict, the language of the test procedure
in this appendix takes precedence over ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
1.1. Instruments. In addition to the instrument accuracy
requirements in section 4, ``Instruments,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293), humidity shall be
measured with a calibrated instrument accurate to 2
percent RH at the specified ambient relative humidity condition
specified in section 2.1.2 of this appendix.
1.2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions specified in
section 3, ``Definitions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 431.293), the following definition is also
applicable to this appendix.
External accessory standby mode means the mode of operation in
which any external, integral customer display signs, lighting, or
digital screens:
(1) Are connected to mains power;
(2) Do not produce the intended illumination, display, or
interaction functionality; and
(3) Can be switched into another mode automatically with only a
remote user-generated or an internal signal.
Instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature means
the spatial average of all standard test packages in the next-to-
vend beverages positions at a given time.
Integrated average temperature means the average temperature of
all standard test package measurements in the next-to-vend beverage
positions taken over the duration of the test, expressed in degrees
Fahrenheit ([deg]F).
Lowest application product temperature means the lowest
integrated average temperature a given basic model is capable of
maintaining so as to comply with the temperature stabilization
requirements specified in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
2. Test Procedure.
2.1. Test Conditions. The test conditions specified in section
6, ``Test Conditions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 431.293) apply to this appendix except that in
section 6.1, ``Voltage and Frequency,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, the
voltage and frequency tolerances specified in section 6.1.a of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 also apply equivalently to section 6.1.b of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 for equipment with dual nameplate voltages.
2.1.1. Average Beverage Temperature. The integrated average
temperature measured during the test must be within 1
[deg]F of the value specified in Table A.1 of this appendix or the
lowest application product temperature for models tested in
accordance with paragraph 2.1.3 of this appendix. The measurement of
integrated average temperature must begin after temperature
stabilization has been achieved and continue for the following 24
consecutive hours. All references to ``Table 1'' in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293) shall instead be
interpreted as references to Table A.1 of this appendix and all
references to ``average beverage temperature'' in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
shall instead be interpreted as references to the integrated average
temperature as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix of this
subpart, except as noted in section 2.1.1.1 of this appendix.
2.1.1.1. Temperature Stabilization. Temperature stabilization
shall be determined in accordance with section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference Sec. 431.293), except that
the reference to ``average beverage temperature'' shall instead
refer to the ``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage
temperature,'' as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix, and the
reference to ``Table 1'' shall instead refer to Table A.1 of this
appendix. That is, temperature stabilization is considered to be
achieved 24 hours after the instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature reaches the specified value (see Table A.1) and
energy consumption for two successive 6 hour periods are within 2
percent of each other.
2.1.2. Ambient Test Conditions. The refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine must be tested at the test
conditions and tolerances specified in the following Table A.1 of
this appendix. The specified ambient temperature and humidity
conditions shall be maintained within the ranges specified for each
recorded measurement. All references to ``Table 1'' in ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293) shall instead be
interpreted as references to Table A.1 of this appendix. In contrast
to the requirements of section 6.1 and Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1,
conduct testing only one time at the conditions referenced in Table
A.1 of this appendix. Testing at alternate ambient conditions is not
required or permitted.
Table A.1--Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Specified Value and Tolerance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable range (based on
Test and pretest condition Value Tolerance value and tolerance)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instantaneous Average Next-to-Vend 36 [deg]F............. 1 [deg]F.. 35-37 [deg]F.
Temperature.
Integrated Average Temperature..... 36 [deg]F............. 1 [deg]F.. N/A (value is averaged
throughout test).
[[Page 45794]]
Ambient Temperature................ 75 [deg]F............. 2 [deg]F.. 73-77 [deg]F.
Relative Humidity.................. 45 percent RH......... 5 percent 40-50 percent RH.
RH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1.3. Lowest Application Product Temperature. If a refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machine is not capable of
maintaining an integrated average temperature of 36 [deg]F (1 [deg]F) during the 24 hour test period, the unit must be
tested at the lowest application product temperature, as defined in
section 1.2 of this appendix. For refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines equipped with a thermostat, the lowest
application product temperature is the integrated average
temperature achieved at the lowest thermostat setting.
2.2. Equipment Installation and Test Set Up. Except as provided
in this appendix, the test procedure for energy consumption of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines shall be
conducted in accordance with the methods specified in sections 7.1
through 7.2.2.3 under ``Test Procedures'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
2.2.1. Equipment Loading. Configure refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines to hold the maximum number of
standard products in the refrigerated compartment(s) and place
standard test packages as specified in section 2.2.1.1 or 2.2.1.2 of
this appendix.
2.2.1.1. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with
Products Arranged Horizontally. For refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines with products arranged horizontally (e.g.,
on shelves or in product spirals), place standard test packages in
the refrigerated compartment(s) in the following locations, as shown
in Figure A.1:
(a) For odd-number shelves, when counting starting from the
bottom shelf, standard test packages shall be placed at:
(1) The left-most next-to-vend product location,
(2) The right-most next-to-vend product location, and
(3) For equipment with greater than or equal to five next-to-
vend product locations on each shelf, either:
(A) The next-to-vend product location in the center of the shelf
(i.e., equidistant from the left-most and right-most next-to-vend
product locations) if there are an odd number of next-to-vend
products on the shelf or
(B) The next-to-vend product location immediately to the right
and the left of the center position if there are an even number of
next-to-vend products on the shelf.
(b) For even-numbered shelves, when counting from the bottom
shelf, standard test packages shall be places at either:
(1) For equipment with less than or equal to six next-to-vend
product locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product
location(s):
(A) One location towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location; and
(B) One location towards to the center from the right-most next-
to-vend product location, or
(2) For equipment with greater than six next-to-vend product
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product locations
(A) Two locations towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location; and
(B) Two locations towards to the center from the right-most
next-to-vend product location.
[[Page 45795]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.023
2.2.1.2. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with
Products Arranged Vertically. For refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines with products arranged vertically (e.g.,
in stacks), place standard test packages in the refrigerated
compartment(s) in each next-to-vend product location.
2.2.1.3. Loading of Combination Vending Machines. For
combination vending machines, the non-refrigerated compartment(s)
must not be loaded with any standard products, test packages, or
other vendible merchandise.
2.2.1.4. Standard Products. The standard product shall be
standard 12-ounce aluminum beverage cans filled with a liquid with a
density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/mL) 0.1 g/mL at
36[emsp14][deg]F. For product storage racks that are not capable of
vending 12-ounce cans, but are capable of vending 20-ounce bottles,
the standard product shall be 20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL 0.1 g/mL at
36[emsp14][deg]F. For product storage racks that are not capable of
vending 12-ounce cans or 20-ounce bottles, the standard product
shall be the packaging and contents specified by the manufacturer in
product literature as the standard product (i.e., the specific
merchandise the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine is designed to vend).
2.2.1.5. Standard Test Packages. A standard test package is a
standard product, as specified in 2.2.1.4 of this appendix, altered
to include a temperature-measuring instrument at its center of mass.
2.2.2. Sensor Placement. The integrated average temperature of
next-to-vend beverages shall be measured in standard test packages
in the next-to-vend product locations specified in section 2.2.1.1
of this appendix. Do not run the thermocouple wire and other
measurement apparatus through the dispensing door; the thermocouple
wire and other measurement apparatus must be configured and sealed
so as to minimize air flow between the interior refrigerated volume
and the ambient room air. If a manufacturer chooses to employ a
method other than routing thermocouple and sensor wires through the
door gasket and ensuring the gasket is compressed around the wire to
ensure a good seal, then it must maintain a record of the method
used in the data underlying that basic model's certification
pursuant to 10 CFR 429.71.
2.2.3. Accessories. (a) All standard components that would be
used during normal operation of the model in the field and are
necessary to provide sufficient functionality for cooling and
vending products in field installations (i.e., product inventory,
temperature management, product merchandising (including, e.g.,
lighting or signage), product selection, and product transport and
delivery) shall be in place during testing and shall be set to the
maximum energy-consuming setting if manually adjustable, except that
the specific components and accessories listed in the subsequent
sections shall be operated as stated. Components not necessary for
the inventory, temperature management, product merchandising (e.g.,
lighting or signage), product selection, and or product transport
and delivery shall be de-energized. If systems not required for the
primary functionality of the machine as stated in this section
cannot be de-energized without preventing the operation of the
machine, then they shall be placed in the lowest energy consuming
state.
(b) Instead of testing pursuant to section 7.2.2.4 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293), provide,
if necessary, any physical stimuli or other input to the machine
needed to prevent automatic activation of energy management systems
that can be adjusted by the machine operator during the test period.
Automatic energy management systems that cannot be adjusted by the
machine operator may be enabled, as specified by section 7.2.1 of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
2.2.3.1. Payment Mechanisms. Refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines shall be tested with no payment mechanism
in place, the payment mechanism in place but de-energized, or the
payment mechanism in place but set to the lowest energy consuming
state, if it cannot be de-energized. A default payment mechanism
energy consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day shall be added to the
primary rated energy consumption per day, as required in section 2.3
of this appendix.
[[Page 45796]]
2.2.3.2. Internal Lighting. All lighting that is contained
within or is part of the internal physical boundary of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine, as
established by the top, bottom, and side panels of the equipment,
shall be placed in its maximum energy consuming state.
2.2.3.3. External Customer Display Signs, Lights, and Digital
Screens. All external customer display signs, lights, and digital
screens that are independent from the refrigeration or vending
performance of the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine must be disconnected, disabled, or otherwise de-energized
for the duration of testing. Customer display signs, lighting, and
digital screens that are integrated into the beverage vending
machine cabinet or controls such that they cannot be de-energized
without disabling the refrigeration or vending functions of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine or modifying
the circuitry must be placed in external accessory standby mode, if
available, or their lowest energy-consuming state. Digital displays
that also serve a vending or money processing function must be
placed in the lowest energy-consuming state that still allows the
money processing feature to function.
2.2.3.4. Anti-sweat and Other Electric Resistance Heaters. Anti-
sweat and other electric resistance heaters must be operational
during the entirety of the test procedure. Units with a user-
selectable setting must have the heaters energized and set to the
most energy-consumptive position. Units featuring an automatic, non-
user-adjustable controller that turns on or off based on
environmental conditions must be operating in the automatic state.
Units that are not shipped with a controller from the point of
manufacture, but are intended to be used with a controller, must be
equipped with an appropriate controller when tested.
2.2.3.5. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps. All electric
resistance condensate heaters and condensate pumps must be installed
and operational during the test. Prior to the start of the test,
including the 24 hour period used to determine temperature
stabilization, as described in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section 7.2.2.2
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293), the condensate pan
must be dry. For the duration of the test, including the 24 hour
time period necessary for temperature stabilization, allow any
condensate moisture generated to accumulate in the pan. Do not
manually add or remove water from the condensate pan at any time
during the test.
2.2.3.6. Illuminated Temperature Displays. All illuminated
temperature displays must be energized and operated during the test
the same way they would be energized and operated during normal
field operation, as recommended in manufacturer product literature,
including manuals.
2.2.3.7. Condenser Filters. Remove any nonpermanent filters
provided to prevent particulates from blocking a model's condenser
coil.
2.2.3.8. Security Covers. Remove any devices used to secure the
model from theft or tampering.
2.2.3.9. General Purpose Outlets. During the test, do not
connect any external load to any general purpose outlets available
on a unit.
2.2.3.10. Crankcase Heaters and Other Electric Resistance
Heaters for Cold Weather. Crankcase heaters and other electric
resistance heaters for cold weather must be operational during the
test. If a control system, such as a thermostat or electronic
controller, is used to modulate the operation of the heater, it must
be activated during the test and operated in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions.
2.2.4. Sampling and Recording of Data. Record the data listed in
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.293) at least every 1 minute. For the purpose of this
subsection, ``average beverage temperature,'' listed in section
7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, means ``instantaneous average next-to-
vend beverage temperature.''
2.3. Determination of Daily Energy Consumption. Determine the
daily energy consumption of each tested refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine as the sum of:
(a) The default payment mechanism energy consumption value from
section 2.2.3.1 of this appendix and
(b) The primary rated energy consumption per day (ED), in kWh,
and determined in accordance with the calculation procedure in
section 7.2.3.1, ``Calculation of Daily Energy Consumption,'' of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
2.3.1. Calculations and Rounding. In all cases, the primary
rated energy consumption per day (ED) must be calculated with raw
measured values and rounded to units of 0.01 kWh/day.
3. Determination of Refrigerated Volume, Vendible Capacity, and
Surface Area.
3.1. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the ``refrigerated volume''
of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with appendix C, ``Measurement of Volume,'' of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293). For
combination vending machines, the ``refrigerated volume'' does not
include any non-refrigerated compartments.
3.2. Vendible Capacity. Determine the ``vendible capacity'' of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with the first paragraph of section 5, ``Vending Machine
Capacity,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.293). For combination vending machines, the ``vendible
capacity'' includes only the capacity of any portion of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is
refrigerated and does not include the capacity of the non-
refrigerated compartment(s).
Appendix B to Subpart Q of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Refrigerated Bottled or Canned
Beverage Vending Machines
Note: After January 27, 2016, manufacturers must make any
representations with respect to energy use or efficiency in
accordance with the results of testing pursuant to appendix A of
this subpart to demonstrate compliance with the energy conservation
standards at 10 CFR 431.296, for which compliance was required as of
August 31, 2012. Alternatively, manufacturers may make
representations based on testing in accordance with this appendix
prior to the compliance date of any amended energy conservation
standards, provided that such representations demonstrate compliance
with such amended energy conservation standards. Any representations
made on or after the compliance date of any amended energy
conservation standards, must be made in accordance with the results
of testing pursuant to this appendix. Any representations made with
respect to the energy use or efficiency of such refrigerated
beverage vending machines must be in accordance with whichever
version is selected.
1. General. Section 3, ``Definitions''; section 4,
``Instruments''; section 5, ``Vendible Capacity''; section 6, ``Test
Conditions''; section 7.1, ``Test Procedures--General
Requirements''; and section 7.2, ``Energy Consumption Test'' of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 431.293)
apply to this appendix except as noted throughout this appendix. In
cases where there is a conflict, the language of the test procedure
in this appendix takes precedence over ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1.
1.1. Instruments. In addition to the instrument accuracy
requirements in section 3, ``Instruments,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293), humidity shall be
measured with a calibrated instrument accurate to 2
percent RH at the specified ambient relative humidity condition
specified in section 2.1.3 of this appendix.
1.2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions specified in
section 3, ``Definitions,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 431.293) the following definitions are also
applicable to this appendix.
Accessory low power mode means a state in which a beverage
vending machine's lighting and/or other energy-using systems are in
low power mode, but that is not a refrigeration low power mode.
Functions that may constitute an accessory low power mode may
include, for example, dimming or turning off lights, but does not
include adjustment of the refrigeration system to elevate the
temperature of the refrigerated compartment(s).
External accessory standby mode means the mode of operation in
which any external, integral customer display signs, lighting, or
digital screens are connected to mains power; do not produce the
intended illumination, display, or interaction functionality; and
can be switched into another mode automatically with only a remote
user-generated or an internal signal.
Instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature means
the spatial average of all standard test packages in the next-to-
vend beverages positions at a given time.
Integrated average temperature means the average temperature of
all standard test package measurements in the next-to-vend
[[Page 45797]]
beverage positions taken over the duration of the test, expressed in
degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F).
Low power mode means a state in which a beverage vending
machine's lighting, refrigeration, and/or other energy-using systems
are automatically adjusted (without user intervention) such that
they consume less energy than they consume in an active vending
environment.
Lowest application product temperature means the lowest
integrated average temperature a given basic model is capable of
maintaining so as to comply with the temperature stabilization
requirements specified in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
Refrigeration low power mode means a state in which a beverage
vending machine's refrigeration system is in low power mode because
of elevation of the temperature of the refrigerated compartment(s).
To qualify as low power mode, the unit must satisfy the requirements
described in section 2.3.2.1 of this appendix.
2. Test Procedure.
2.1. Test Conditions. The test conditions specified in section
6, ``Test Conditions'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 431.293) apply to this appendix except that in
section 6.1, ``Voltage and Frequency,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, the
voltage and frequency tolerances specified in section 6.1.a of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 also apply equivalently to section 6.1.b of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 for equipment with dual nameplate voltages.
2.1.1. Average Beverage Temperature. The integrated average
temperature measured during the test must be within 1[emsp14][deg]F of the value specified in Table B.1 of this
appendix or the lowest application product temperature for models
tested in accordance with paragraph 2.1.3 of this appendix. The
measurement of integrated average temperature must begin after
temperature stabilization has been achieve and continue for the
following 24 consecutive hours. All references to ``Table 1'' in
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293)
shall instead be interpreted as references to Table B.1 of this
appendix and all references to ``average beverage temperature'' in
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 shall instead be interpreted as references to the
integrated average temperature as defined in section 1.2 of this
appendix, except as noted in section 2.1.1.1 of this appendix.
2.1.1.1. Temperature Stabilization. Temperature stabilization
shall be determined in accordance with section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference Sec. 431.293), except that
the reference to ``average beverage temperature'' shall instead
refer to the ``instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage
temperature,'' as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix, and the
reference to ``Table 1'' shall instead refer to Table A.1 of this
appendix. That is, temperature stabilization is considered to be
achieved 24 hours after the instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature reaches the specified value (see Table A.1) and
energy consumption for two successive 6 hour periods are within 2
percent of each other.
2.1.2. Ambient Test Conditions. The refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machine must be tested at the test
conditions and tolerances specified in the following Table B.1 of
this appendix. The specified ambient temperature and humidity
conditions shall be maintained within the ranges specified for each
recorded measurement. All references to ``Table 1'' in ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293) shall instead be
interpreted as references to Table B.1 of this appendix. In contrast
to the requirements of section 6.1 and Table 1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1,
conduct testing only one time at the conditions referenced in Table
B.1 of this appendix. Testing at alternate ambient conditions is not
required or permitted.
Table B.1--Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity Specified Value and Tolerance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable range (based on
Test and pretest condition Value Tolerance value and tolerance)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instantaneous Average Next-to-Vend 36 [deg]F............. 1 [deg]F.. 35-37 [deg]F.
Temperature.
Integrated Average Temperature..... 36 [deg]F............. 1 [deg]F.. N/A (value is averaged
throughout test).
Ambient Temperature................ 75 [deg]F............. 2 [deg]F.. 73-77 [deg]F.
Relative Humidity.................. 45 percent RH......... 5 percent 40-50 percent RH.
RH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1.3. Lowest Application Product Temperature. If a refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machine is not capable of
maintaining an integrated average temperature of 36[emsp14][deg]F
(1[emsp14][deg]F) during the 24 hour test period, the
unit must be tested at the lowest application product temperature,
as defined in section 1.2 of this appendix. For refrigerated bottled
or canned beverage vending machines equipped with a thermostat, the
lowest application product temperature is the integrated average
temperature achieved at the lowest thermostat setting.
2.2. Equipment Installation and Test Set Up. Except as provided
in this section 2.2 of appendix, the test procedure for energy
consumption of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machines shall be conducted in accordance with the methods specified
in sections 7.1 through 7.2.2.3 under ``Test Procedures'' of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
2.2.1. Equipment Loading. Configure refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines to hold the maximum number of
standard products, and place standard test packages in the
refrigerated compartment(s) as specified in section 2.2.1.1 or
2.2.1.2 of this appendix.
2.2.1.1. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with
Products Arranged Horizontally. For refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines with products arranged horizontally (e.g.,
on shelves or in product spirals), place standard test packages in
the refrigerated compartment(s) in the following locations, as shown
in Figure B.1:
(a) For odd-number shelves, when counting starting from the
bottom shelf, standard test packages shall be placed at:
(1) The left-most next-to-vend product location;
(2) The right-most next-to-vend product location; and
(3) For equipment with greater than or equal to five product
locations on each shelf, either:
(i) The next-to-vend product location in the center of the shelf
(i.e., equidistant from the left-most and right-most next-to-vend
product locations) if there are an odd number of next-to-vend
products on the shelf or,
(ii) The next-to-vend product location immediately to the right
and the left of the center position if there are an even number of
next-to-vend products on the shelf.
(b) For even-numbered shelves, when counting from the bottom
shelf, standard test packages shall be places at either:
(1) For equipment with less than or equal to six next-to-vend
product locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product
location(s);
(i) One position towards the center from the left-most next-to-
vend product location; and
(ii) One location towards to the center from the right-most
next-to-vend product location; or
(2) For equipment with greater than six next-to-vend product
locations on each shelf, the next-to-vend product locations:
(i) Two selections towards the center from the left-most next-
to-vend product location; and
(ii) Two locations towards to the center from the right-most
next-to-vend product location.
[[Page 45798]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31JY15.024
2.2.1.2. Placement of Standard Test Packages for Equipment with
Products Arranged Vertically. For refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines with products arranged vertically (e.g.,
in stacks), place standard test packages in the refrigerated
compartment(s) in each next-to-vend product location.
2.2.1.3. Loading of Combination Vending Machines. For
combination vending machines, the non-refrigerated compartment(s)
must not be loaded with any standard products, test packages, or
other vendible merchandise.
2.2.1.4. Standard Products. The standard product shall be
standard 12-ounce aluminum beverage cans filled with a liquid with a
density of 1.0 grams per milliliter (g/mL) 0.1 g/mL at
36[emsp14][deg]F. For product storage racks that are not capable of
vending 12-ounce cans, but are capable of vending 20-ounce bottles,
the standard product shall be 20-ounce plastic bottles filled with a
liquid with a density of 1.0 g/mL 0.1 g/mL at 36[deg]F.
For product storage racks that are not capable of vending 12-ounce
cans or 20-ounce bottles, the standard product shall be the
packaging and contents specified by the manufacturer in product
literature as the standard product (i.e., the specific merchandise
the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine is
designed to vend).
2.2.1.5. Standard Test Packages. A standard test package is a
standard product, as specified in 2.2.1.4 of this appendix, altered
to include a temperature-measuring instrument at its center of mass.
2.2.2. Sensor Placement. The integrated average temperature of
next-to-vend beverages shall be measured in standard test packages
in the next-to-vend product locations specified in section 2.2.1.1
of this appendix. Do not run the thermocouple wire and other
measurement apparatus through the dispensing door; the thermocouple
wire and other measurement apparatus must be configured and sealed
so as to minimize air flow between the interior refrigerated volume
and the ambient room air. If a manufacturer chooses to employ a
method other than routing thermocouple and sensor wires through the
door gasket and ensuring the gasket is compressed around the wire to
ensure a good seal, then it must maintain a record of the method
used in the data underlying that basic model's certification
pursuant to 10 CFR 429.71.
2.2.3. Vending Mode Test Period. The vending mode test period
begins after temperature stabilization has been achieved, as
described in ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section 7.2.2.2 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 431.293) and continues for 18 hours for
equipment with an accessory low power mode or for 24 hours for
equipment without an accessory low power mode. For the vending mode
test period, equipment that has energy-saving features that cannot
be disabled shall have those features set to the most energy-
consuming settings, except for as specified in section 2.2.4 of this
appendix. In addition, all energy management systems shall be
disabled. Instead of testing pursuant to sections 7.1.1(d) and
7.2.2.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, provide, if necessary, any physical
stimuli or other input to the machine needed to prevent automatic
activation of low power modes during the vending mode test period.
2.2.4. Accessory Low Power Mode Test Period. For equipment with
an accessory low power mode, the accessory low power mode may be
engaged for 6 hours, beginning 18 hours after the temperature
stabilization requirements established in section 7.2.2.2 of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293) have been
achieved, and continuing until the end of the 24-hour test period.
During the accessory low power mode test, operate the refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending machine with the lowest energy-
consuming lighting and control settings that constitute an accessory
low power mode. The specification and tolerances for integrated
average temperature in Table B.1 of this appendix still apply, and
any refrigeration low power mode must not be engaged. Instead of
testing pursuant to sections 7.1.1(d) and 7.2.2.4 of ANSI/ASHRAE
32.1, provide, if necessary, any physical stimuli or other input to
the machine needed to prevent automatic activation of refrigeration
low power modes during the accessory low power mode test period.
2.2.5. Accessories. Unless specified otherwise in this appendix,
all standard
[[Page 45799]]
components that would be used during normal operation of the basic
model in the field and are necessary to provide sufficient
functionality for cooling and vending products in field
installations (i.e., product inventory, temperature management,
product merchandising(including, e.g., lighting or signage), product
selection, and product transport and delivery) shall be in place
during testing and shall be set to the maximum energy-consuming
setting if manually adjustable. Components not necessary for the
inventory, temperature management, product merchandising (e.g.,
lighting or signage), product selection, or product transport and
delivery shall be de-energized. If systems not required for the
primary functionality of the machine as stated in this section
cannot be de-energized without preventing the operation of the
machine, then they shall be placed in the lowest energy consuming
state Components with controls that are permanently operational and
cannot be adjusted by the machine operator shall be operated in
their normal setting and consistent with the requirements of 2.2.3
and 2.2.4 of this appendix. The specific components and accessories
listed in the subsequent sections shall be operated as stated during
the test, except when controlled as part of a low power mode during
the low power mode test period.
2.2.5.1 Payment Mechanisms. Refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines shall be tested with no payment mechanism
in place, the payment mechanism in-place but de-energized, or the
payment mechanism in place but set to the lowest energy consuming
state, if it cannot be de-energized. A default payment mechanism
energy consumption value of 0.20 kWh/day shall be added to the
primary rated energy consumption per day, as noted in section 2.3 of
this appendix.
2.2.5.2. Internal Lighting. All lighting that is contained
within or is part of the internal physical boundary of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine, as
established by the top, bottom, and side panels of the equipment,
shall be placed in its maximum energy consuming state.
2.2.5.3. External Customer Display Signs, Lights, and Digital
Screens. All external customer display signs, lights, and digital
screens that are independent from the refrigeration or vending
performance of the refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine must be disconnected, disabled, or otherwise de-energized
for the duration of testing. Customer display signs, lighting, and
digital screens that are integrated into the beverage vending
machine cabinet or controls such that they cannot be de-energized
without disabling the refrigeration or vending functions of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine or modifying
the circuitry must be placed in external accessory standby mode, if
available, or their lowest energy-consuming state. Digital displays
that also serve a vending or money processing function must be
placed in the lowest energy-consuming state that still allows the
money processing feature to function.
2.2.5.4. Anti-sweat or Other Electric Resistance Heaters. Anti-
sweat or other electric resistance heaters must be operational
during the entirety of the test procedure. Units with a user-
selectable setting must have the heaters energized and set to the
most energy-consumptive position. Units featuring an automatic, non-
user-adjustable controller that turns on or off based on
environmental conditions must be operating in the automatic state.
Units that are not shipped with a controller from the point of
manufacture, but are intended to be used with a controller, must be
equipped with an appropriate controller when tested.
2.2.5.5. Condensate Pan Heaters and Pumps. All electric
resistance condensate heaters and condensate pumps must be installed
and operational during the test. Prior to the start of the test,
including the 24 hour period used to determine temperature
stabilization prior to the start of the test period, as described in
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 section 7.2.2.2 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.293), the condensate pan must be dry. For the duration of
the test, including the 24 hour time period necessary for
temperature stabilization, allow any condensate moisture generated
to accumulate in the pan. Do not manually add or remove water from
the condensate pan at any time during the test. Any automatic
controls that initiate the operation of the condensate pan heater or
pump based on water level or ambient conditions must be enabled and
operated in the automatic setting.
2.2.5.6. Illuminated Temperature Displays. All illuminated
temperature displays must be energized and operated during the test
the same way they would be energized and operated during normal
field operation, as recommended in manufacturer product literature,
including manuals.
2.2.5.7. Condenser Filters. Remove any nonpermanent filters
provided to prevent particulates from blocking a model's condenser
coil.
2.2.5.8. Security Covers. Remove any devices used to secure the
model from theft or tampering.
2.2.5.9. General Purpose Outlets. During the test, do not
connect any external load to any general purpose outlets available
on a unit.
2.2.5.10. Crankcase Heaters and Other Electric Resistance
Heaters for Cold Weather. Crankcase heaters and other electric
resistance heaters for cold weather must be operational during the
test. If a control system, such as a thermostat or electronic
controller, is used to modulate the operation of the heater, it must
be activated during the test and operated in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions.
2.2.6. Sampling and Recording of Data. Record the data listed in
section 7.2.2.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.293), at least every 1 minute. For the purpose of this
section, ``average beverage temperature,'' listed in section 7.2.2.3
of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1, means ``instantaneous average next-to-vend
beverage temperature.''
2.3. Determination of Daily Energy Consumption. In section
7.2.3.1 of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
431.293), the primary rated energy consumption per day (ED) shall be
the energy measured during the vending mode test period and
accessory low power mode test period, as specified in sections 2.2.3
and 2.2.4 of this appendix, as applicable.
2.3.1. Energy Consumption of Payment Mechanisms. Calculate the
sum of:
(a) The default payment mechanism energy consumption value from
section 2.2.5.1 and
(b) The primary rated energy consumption per day (ED), in kWh,
and determined in accordance with the calculation procedure in
section 7.2.3.1, ``Calculation of Daily Energy Consumption,'' of
ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293).
2.3.2. Refrigeration Low Power Mode. For refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines with a refrigeration low power
mode, multiply the value determined in section 2.3.1 of this
appendix by 0.97 to determine the daily energy consumption of the
unit tested. For refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machines without a refrigeration low power mode, the value
determined in section 2.3.1 is the daily energy consumption of the
unit tested.
2.3.2.1. Refrigeration Low Power Mode Validation Test Method.
This test method is not required for the certification of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines. To verify
the existence of a refrigeration low power mode, initiate the
refrigeration low power mode in accordance with manufacturer
instructions contained in product literature and manuals, after
completion of the 6-hour low power mode test period. Continue
recording all the data specified in section 2.2.6 of this appendix
until existence of a refrigeration low power mode has been confirmed
or denied. The refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending
machine shall be deemed to have a refrigeration low power mode if
either:
(a) The following three requirements have been satisfied:
(1) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature
must reach at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, within 6 hours.
(2) The instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage temperature
must be maintained at least 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, for at least 1 hour.
(3) After the instantaneous average next-to-vend beverage
temperature is maintained at or above 4[emsp14][deg]F above the
integrated average temperature or lowest application product
temperature, as applicable, for at least 1 hour, the refrigerated
beverage vending machine must return to the specified integrated
average temperature or lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, automatically without direct physical intervention.
(b) Or, the compressor does not cycle on for the entire 6 hour
period, in which case the instantaneous average beverage temperature
does not have to reach 4[emsp14][deg]F above the integrated average
temperature or lowest application product temperature, as
applicable, but, the equipment must still automatically return to
the integrated average temperature or lowest application product
temperature, as applicable, after the 6 hour period without direct
physical intervention.
[[Page 45800]]
2.3.3. Calculations and Rounding. In all cases, the primary
rated energy consumption per day (ED) must be calculated
with raw measured values and the final result rounded to units of
0.01 kWh/day.
3. Determination of Refrigeration Volume, Vendible Capacity, and
Surface Area.
3.1. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the ``refrigerated volume''
of refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with Appendix C, ``Measurement of Volume,'' of ANSI/
ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.293). For
combination vending machines, the ``refrigerated volume'' does not
include any non-refrigerated compartment(s).
3.2. Vendible Capacity. Determine the ``vendible capacity'' of
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machines in
accordance with the first paragraph of section 5, ``Vending Machine
Capacity,'' of ANSI/ASHRAE 32.1 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 431.293). For combination vending machines, the ``vendible
capacity'' includes only the capacity of any portion of the
refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine that is
refrigerated and does not include the capacity of the non-
refrigerated compartment(s).
3.3. Determination of Surface Area. Note: This section is not
required for the certification of refrigerated bottled or canned
beverage vending machines. Determine the surface area of each
beverage vending machine as the length multiplied by the height of
outermost surface of the beverage vending machine cabinet, measured
from edge to edge excluding any legs or other protrusions that
extend beyond the dimensions of the primary cabinet. Determine the
transparent and non-transparent areas on each side of a beverage
vending machine as the total surface area of material that is
transparent or is not transparent, respectively.
[FR Doc. 2015-17967 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
