Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial and Industrial Pumps, 17934-17986 [2023-05635]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17934
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE–2020–BT–TP–0032]
RIN 1904–AE53
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedure for Commercial and
Industrial Pumps
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends the
test procedure for commercial and
industrial pumps (‘‘pumps’’) to
incorporate by reference relevant
portions of the latest version of the
industry testing standard, expands the
scope of clean water pumps covered by
this test procedure, revises calculation
methods for pumps sold with motors
and controls to better represent field
energy use, adds and updates certain
definitions, and allows the use of
alternative efficiency determination
methods for the rating and certification
of pumps.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is
April 24, 2023. The amendments will be
mandatory for product testing starting
September 20, 2023.
The incorporation by reference of
certain materials listed in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register on April 24, 2023. The
incorporation by reference of certain
other materials listed in this rule was
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register on January 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes
Federal Register notices, public meeting
attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
However, not all documents listed in
the index may be publicly available,
such as those containing information
that is exempt from public disclosure.
A link to the docket web page can be
found at www.regulations.gov/docket/
EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032. The docket
web page contains instructions on how
to access all documents, including
public comments, in the docket.
For further information on how to
review the docket contact the Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program staff
at (202) 287–1445 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE–2J, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–
9870. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Nolan Brickwood, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, GC–33, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–
4498. Email: Nolan.Brickwood@
hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE
incorporates by reference the following
industry standards into part 431:
HI 40.6–2021, ‘‘Methods For
Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency
Testing’’;
ANSI/HI 9.6.1–2017, ‘‘Rotodynamic
Pumps Guideline for NPSH Margin’’;
ANSI/HI 9.6.6–2016, ‘‘Rotodynamic
Pumps for Pump Piping’’;
ANSI/HI 9.8–2018, ‘‘Rotodynamic
Pumps for Pump Intake Design’’;
ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019,
‘‘Rotodynamic Pumps for
Nomenclature and Definitions’’;
HI Engineering Data Book—Second
Edition;
Copies of HI 40.6–2021, ANSI/HI
9.6.1–2017, ANSI/HI 9.6.6–2016, ANSI/
HI 9.8–2018, ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019,
and the HI Engineering Data Book—
Second Edition, can be obtained from
the Hydraulics Institute (HI), 300
Interpace Parkway, 3rd Bldg. A Floor,
Parsippany, NJ 07054, (973) 267–9700,
or online at: www.Pumps.org.
ANSI/ASME MFC–5M–1985
(Reaffirmed 2006), ‘‘Measurement of
Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using
Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters’’
(‘‘ANSI/ASME MFC–5M–1985’’);
ASME MFC–3M–2004 (Reaffirmed
2017), ‘‘Measurement of Fluid Flow in
Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and
Venturi’’ (‘‘ASME MFC–3M–2004’’);
ASME MFC–8M–2001 (Reaffirmed
2011), ‘‘Fluid Flow in Closed
Conduits: Connections for Pressure
Signal Transmissions Between
Primary and Secondary Devices’’;
ASME MFC–12M–2006 (Reaffirmed
2014), ‘‘Measurement of Fluid Flow in
Closed Conduits Using Multiport
Averaging Pitot Primary Elements’’
(‘‘ASME MFC–12M–2006’’);
ASME MFC–16–2014, ‘‘Measurement of
Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits with
Electromagnetic Flowmeters’’;
ASME MFC–22–2007 (Reaffirmed 2014),
‘‘Measurement of Liquid by Turbine
Flowmeters’’ (‘‘ASME MFC–22–
2007’’);
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Copies of ANSI/ASME MFC–5M–
1985, ASME MFC–3M–2004, ASME
MFC–8M–2001, ASME MFC–12M–
2006, ASME MFC–16–2014, and ASME
MFC–22–2007 can be obtained from the
American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), Two Park Avenue,
New York, NY 10016–5990, (800) 843–
2763, or online at: www.asme.org.
ANSI/AWWA E103–2015, ‘‘Horizontal
and Vertical Line-Shaft Pumps’’
(‘‘AWWA E103–2015’’);
Copies of AWWA E103–2015 can be
obtained from the American Water
Works Association (AWWA), 6666 W
Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235,
(303) 794–7711, or online at:
www.awwa.org.
CSA C390–10, ‘‘Test methods, marking
requirements, and energy efficiency
levels for three-phase induction
motors’’;
Copies of CSA C390–10 can be
obtained from the Canadian Standards
Association (CSA), 178 Rexdale Blvd.,
Toronto, ON, Canada M9W 1R3, (800)
463–6727, or online at
www.csagroup.org.
IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test
Procedure for Polyphase Induction
Motors and Generators’’;
IEEE 114–2010, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test
Procedure for Single-Phase Induction
Motors’’;
Copies of IEEE 112–2017 and IEEE
114–2010 can be obtained from the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE), 445 Hoes Lane,
Piscataway, NJ 08854–4141, (732) 981–
0060, or online at standards.ieee.org.
ISO 1438:2017(E), ‘‘Hydrometry—Open
channel flow measurement using
thin-plate weirs’’ (‘‘ISO 1438:2017’’);
ISO 2186:2007(E), ‘‘Fluid flow in closed
conduits—Connections for pressure
signal transmissions between primary
and secondary elements’’ (‘‘ISO
2186:2007’’);
ISO 2715:2017(E), ‘‘Liquid
hydrocarbons—Volumetric
measurement by turbine flowmeter’’
(‘‘ISO 2715:2017’’);
ISO 3354:2008(E), ‘‘Measurement of
clean water flow in closed conduits—
Velocity-area method using currentmeters in full conduits and under
regular flow conditions’’ (‘‘ISO
3354:2008’’);
ISO 3966:2020(E), ‘‘Measurement of
fluid flow in closed conduits—
Velocity area method using Pitot
static tubes’’ (‘‘ISO 3996:2020’’);
ISO 5167–1:2003(E), ‘‘Measurement of
fluid flow by means of pressure
differential devices inserted in
circular cross-section conduits
running full—Part 1: General
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
principles and requirements’’ (‘‘ISO
5167–1:2003’’);
ISO 5198:1987(E), ‘‘Centrifugal, mixed
flow and axial pumps—Code for
hydraulic performance tests—
Precision class’’ (‘‘ISO 5198:1987’’);
ISO 6416:2017(E), ‘‘Hydrometry—
Measurement of discharge by the
ultrasonic transit time (time of flight)
method’’ (‘‘ISO 6416:2017’’);
ISO 20456:2017(E), ‘‘Measurement of
fluid flow in closed conduits—
Guidance for the use of
electromagnetic flowmeters for
conductive liquids’’ (‘‘ISO
20456:2017’’);
Copies of ISO 1438:2017, ISO
2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167–
1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017,
and ISO 20456:2017 can be obtained
from the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), Chemin de
Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier,
Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11,
or online at: www.iso.org.
For a further discussion of these
standards, see section IV.N of this
document.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Applicability
1. Pumps Not Designed for Clean Water
Applications
2. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
3. Other Clean Water Pump Categories
4. Scope Limitations
B. Definitions
1. Removing Certain References to Volute
2. HI Pump Class References
3. Bowl Diameter
4. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
5. Between-Bearing Pumps
6. Vertical Turbine Pump
7. Radially-Split, Multi-Stage Horizontal
Pumps
8. Close-Coupled and MechanicallyCoupled Pumps
C. Updates to Industry Standards
1. ANSI/HI 40.6
2. ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1–
2.2–2014
D. Metric
E. Amendments to Test Method
1. Nominal Speed
2. Testing of Multi-Stage Pumps
3. Load Profile
4. Pumps With BEP at Run-Out
5. Calibration of Measurement Equipment
6. Calculations and Rounding
F. Calculation-Based and Testing-Based
Options According to Pump
Configuration (Table 1 of Appendix A)
1. Hybrid Mapping Approach
2. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold
With Induction Motors and Controls
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
3. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold
With Inverter-Only Motors (With or
Without Controls)
4. Pumps Sold With Submersible Motors
G. Test Procedure for SVIL Pumps
1. Applicable Motor Regulations
2. SVIL Paired With Motors Less Than 0.25
Horsepower
3. SVIL Paired With Other Motors Not
Covered by DOE Regulations
4. Part-Load Loss Curves
H. Test Procedure for Other Expanded
Scope Pumps
1. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps to
HI 40.6
2. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps
With Motors
I. Sampling Plan, AEDMs, Enforcement
Provisions, and Basic Model
1. Sampling Plan for Determining
Represented Values
2. Alternative Efficiency Determination
Methods
3. Enforcement Provisions
4. Basic Model Definition
J. Representations of Energy Use and
Energy Efficiency
K. Test Procedure Costs and
Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
L. Compliance Date
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866
and 13563
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 Materials Incorporated by
Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Commercial and industrial pumps
(collectively, ‘‘pumps’’) are included in
the list of ‘‘covered equipment’’ for
which the U.S. Department of Energy
(‘‘DOE’’) is authorized to establish and
amend energy conservation standards
and test procedures. (42 U.S.C.
6311(1)(A)) DOE’s energy conservation
standards and test procedures for
pumps are currently prescribed at title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(‘‘CFR’’), § 431.464, and 10 CFR part 431
subpart Y appendix A (‘‘appendix A’’).
The following sections discuss DOE’s
authority to establish test procedures for
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17935
pumps and relevant background
information regarding DOE’s
consideration of test procedures for this
equipment.
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act, Public Law 94–163, as amended
(‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes DOE to regulate
the energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291–
6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA,2
established the Energy Conservation
Program for Certain Industrial
Equipment, which sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy
efficiency. This equipment includes
pumps, the subject of this document.
(42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A))
The energy conservation program
under EPCA consists essentially of four
parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal
energy conservation standards, and (4)
certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of
EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C.
6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314),
labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315),
energy conservation standards (42
U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to
require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316; 42
U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements
consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered equipment
must use as the basis for: (1) certifying
to DOE that their equipment complies
with the applicable energy conservation
standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and
(2) making other representations about
the efficiency of that equipment (42
U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE must
use these test procedures to determine
whether the equipment complies with
relevant standards promulgated under
EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C.
6295(s))
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally
supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing,
labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C.
6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C.
6297). DOE may, however, grant waivers
of Federal preemption for particular
State laws or regulations, in accordance
with the procedures and other
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the Energy Act
of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020), which
reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A–1 of EPCA.
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated Part A–1.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17936
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6316(b)(2)(D).
Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth
the criteria and procedures DOE must
follow when prescribing or amending
test procedures for covered equipment.
EPCA requires that any test procedures
prescribed or amended under this
section must be reasonably designed to
produce test results which reflect energy
efficiency, energy use or estimated
annual operating cost of a given type of
covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle (as
determined by the Secretary) and
requires that test procedures not be
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
EPCA also requires that, at least once
every 7 years, DOE evaluate test
procedures for each type of covered
equipment, including pumps, to
determine whether amended test
procedures would more accurately or
fully comply with the requirements for
the test procedures to not be unduly
burdensome to conduct and be
reasonably designed to produce test
results that reflect energy efficiency,
energy use, and estimated operating
costs during a representative average
use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)
In addition, if the Secretary
determines that a test procedure
amendment is warranted, the Secretary
must publish proposed test procedures
in the Federal Register, and afford
interested persons an opportunity (of
not less than 45 days’ duration) to
present oral and written data, views,
and arguments on the proposed test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)). If DOE
determines that test procedure revisions
are not appropriate, DOE must publish
its determination not to amend the test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))
DOE is publishing this final rule in
satisfaction of the 7-year review
requirement specified in EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6314(b)(1))
B. Background
DOE established its test procedure for
pumps in a final rule published on
January 25, 2016. 81 FR 4086 (‘‘January
2016 Final Rule’’).3 The January 2016
Final Rule established definitions for
the terms ‘‘pump,’’ 4 ‘‘driver,’’ 5 and
‘‘controls,’’ 6 and identified several
categories and configurations of pumps.
The pumps test procedure currently
incorporates by reference the Hydraulic
Institute (‘‘HI’’) Standard 40.6–2014,
‘‘Methods for Rotodynamic Pump
Efficiency Testing’’ (‘‘HI 40.6–2014’’),
along with several modifications to that
testing method related to measuring the
hydraulic power, shaft power, and
electric input power of pumps,
inclusive of electric motors and any
continuous or non-continuous controls.7
On September 28, 2020, DOE
published an early assessment review
request for information (‘‘RFI’’) to
determine whether to proceed with a
rulemaking to amend the test procedure
for pumps. 85 FR 60734 (‘‘September
2020 Early Assessment RFI’’). DOE
subsequently published an RFI on April
16, 2021 seeking further data and
information pertaining to the test
procedure for pumps. 86 FR 20075
(‘‘April 2021 RFI’’). On April 11, 2022,
DOE published a test procedure notice
of proposed rulemaking presenting
DOE’s proposals to amend the pumps
test procedure. 87 FR 21268 (‘‘April
2022 NOPR’’). DOE held a public
meeting related to the April 2022 NOPR
on April 26, 2022 (‘‘NOPR public
meeting’’).
DOE received comments in response
to the April 2022 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
TABLE I.1—LIST OF COMMENTERS WITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE APRIL 2022 NOPR
Comment No.
in the docket
Commenter(s)
Reference in this final rule
Commenter type
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, American Council
for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Natural Resources Defense Council.
ebm-pabst, Inc ..........................................................................
Grundfos Americas Corporation ...............................................
Hydraulic Institute .....................................................................
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance .......................................
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison; collectively, the California Investor-Owned Utilities.
People’s Republic of China ......................................................
Efficiency Advocates ...............
30
Efficiency Organizations.
ebm-pabst ...............................
Grundfos .................................
HI ............................................
NEEA ......................................
CA IOUs ..................................
n/a
31
33
34
32
Motor Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Trade Association.
Efficiency Organization.
Utilities.
China .......................................
29
Country.
A parenthetical reference at the end of
a comment quotation or paraphrase
provides the location of the item in the
public record.8 To the extent that
interested parties have provided written
comments that are substantively
consistent with any oral comments
provided during the NOPR public
meeting, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule.
Any oral comments provided during the
webinar that are not substantively
addressed by written comments are
summarized and cited separately
throughout this final rule.
3 On March 23, 2016, DOE published a correction
to the January 2016 Final Rule to correct the
placement of the product-specific enforcement
provisions related to pumps under 10 CFR
429.134(i). 81 FR 15426.
4 A ‘‘pump’’ means equipment designed to move
liquids (which may include entrained gases, free
solids, and totally dissolved solids) by physical or
mechanical action and includes a bare pump and,
if included by the manufacturer at the time of sale,
mechanical equipment, driver, and controls. (10
CFR 431.462)
5 A ‘‘driver’’ provides mechanical input to drive
a bare pump directly or through the use of
mechanical equipment. Electric motors, internal
combustion engines, and gas/steam turbines are
examples of drivers. (10 CFR 431.462)
6 A ‘‘control’’ is used to operate a driver. (10 CFR
431.462)
7 A ‘‘continuous control’’ is a control that adjusts
the speed of the pump driver continuously over the
driver operating speed range in response to
incremental changes in the required pump flow,
head, or power output. A ‘‘non-continuous control’’
is a control that adjusts the speed of a driver to one
of a discrete number of non-continuous preset
operating speeds and does not respond to
incremental reductions in the required pump flow,
head, or power output. 10 CFR 431.462.
8 The parenthetical reference provides a reference
for information located in the docket of DOE’s
rulemaking to develop test procedures for pumps.
(Docket No. EERE–2020–BT–TP–0032, which is
maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references
are arranged as follows: (commenter name,
comment docket ID number, page of that
document).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
In this final rule, DOE amends
§§ 431.462, 431.463, 431.464, and
appendix A as follows:
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(1) Expand the scope of the test
procedure to include additional clean
water pumps, specifically radially-split,
multi-stage, horizontal (‘‘RSH’’) pumps;
radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal inline diffuser casing (‘‘RSHIL’’) pumps;
radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal,
end-suction diffuser casing (‘‘RSHES’’)
pumps; small vertical in-line (‘‘SVIL’’)
pumps; vertical turbine (‘‘VT’’) pumps;
pumps sold with 6-pole induction
motors or motors with design speeds
greater than or equal to 960 rpm and
less than 1,440 rpm; and end-suction
pumps not covered by the current test
procedure;
(2) Clarify the applicability of the
design temperature range and modify
the range parameters;
(3) Add and modify certain
definitions in 10 CFR 431.462 to
accommodate the expansion of the test
procedure’s scope and to clarify existing
definitions;
(4) Incorporate by reference HI 40.6–
2021 into 10 CFR 431.463 and remove
language in the DOE test procedure that
is redundant with HI 40.6–2021;
(5) Clarify certain test provisions for
pumps with BEP at run-out;
(6) Update part-load loss factor
equation coefficients in the calculation
method for pumps sold with induction
motors and controls;
(7) Provide a calculation method for
pumps sold with inverter-only motors;
17937
(8) Update the test procedure for
submersible pumps to address DOE’s
coverage of submersible motors;
(9) Add provisions for testing and
rating RSH, SVIL, VT pumps, and
pumps sold with a 6-pole induction
motors or with design speeds greater
than or equal to 960 rpm and less than
1,440 rpm; and
(10) Allow use of alternative
efficiency determination methods
(‘‘AEDMs’’).
The adopted amendments are
summarized in Table II.1 compared to
the current test procedure provision
prior to the amendment, as well as the
reason for the adopted change.
TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN THE AMENDED TEST PROCEDURE
DOE test procedure prior to amendment
Amended test procedure
Does not include in the scope of the test procedure
RSHIL, RSHES, SVIL, or VT pumps; pumps distributed in commerce with nominal speeds of 1,200 rpm;
or all end-suction pumps.
Includes a scope limitation of a design temperature
range from 14 to 248 °F.
Includes in the scope of the test procedure RSHIL,
RSHES, SVIL, and VT pumps; pumps distributed in
commerce with nominal speeds of 1,200 rpm; and all
end-suction pumps.
Specifies a scope limitation of a pump whose design
temperature range falls wholly or partially into the
range from 15 to 250 °F.
Includes definitions for additional pump categories and
clarifications to the definitions for some existing pump
categories.
Incorporates by reference HI 40.6–2021 for determining
the PEICL and the PEIVL value of pumps.
Required for scope expansion; improved enforceability.
Updates to applicable industry test standard.
Removes example pump categories from all relevant
definitions.
Simplification of the test
procedure.
Simplification of the test
procedure.
Does not include test provisions for multistage pumps
other than RSV and ST.
Includes provisions for pumps with BEP at run-out .........
Incorporates a definition for ‘‘intermediate bowl’’ in the
definition for bowl diameter, removing the reference
to ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014.
Includes specifications for stages for testing for RSHIL,
RSHES, and VT pumps.
Clarifies provisions for pumps with BEP at run-out ........
References a section of HI 40.6–2014 related to calibration of measurement equipment.
Includes a calculation method for pumps sold with induction motors and controls.
Does not provide a calculation method for pumps sold
with inverter-only motors.
Includes test provisions specific to submersible pumps
based on default motor efficiency.
Clarifies the applicable test provisions in HI 40.6–2021
for calibration of measurement equipment.
Includes revised part-load loss factor equation coefficients for motors 50 hp and above.
Provides a calculation method for pumps sold with inverter-only motors.
Includes test provisions specific to submersible pumps
based on DOE’s coverage of submersible motors.
Does not include test provisions specific to SVILs ..........
Includes test provisions specific to SVILs ......................
Does not include provisions for testing pumps distributed
in commerce with 6-pole motors or motors with design
speeds greater than or equal to 960 rpm and less
than 1,440 rpm.
Does not allow use of AEDMs .........................................
Includes provisions for testing pumps sold with 6-pole
motors or motors with design speeds greater than or
equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm.
Includes definitions for pump categories within the current scope of the test procedure.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Incorporates by reference HI 40.6–2014 for determining
the constant load pump energy index (‘‘PEICL’’) and
the variable load pump energy index (‘‘PEIVL’’) value
of pumps.
Provides example pump categories for certain pump
definitions by referencing ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014.
References ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 to define ‘‘intermediate bowl’’ within the definition for bowl diameter.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Attribution
Allows use of AEDMs .....................................................
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Improved representativeness.
Improved clarity and enforceability.
Required for scope expansion.
Improved repeatability and
reproducibility.
Improved repeatability and
reproducibility.
Improved representativeness.
Reduced burden.
Allows for seamless update
if or when DOE finalizes
submersible motor coverage.
Required for scope expansion.
Improved representativeness.
Reduced burden.
17938
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DOE has determined that the
amendments described in section III of
this final rule would not alter the
measured efficiency 9 of commercial and
industrial pumps that are currently
included in the scope of DOE’s energy
conservation standards for pumps.
Therefore, DOE does not expect that
retesting or recertification would be
necessary for currently certified pumps
as a result of DOE’s adoption of the
amendments to the test procedures.
Additionally, DOE has determined that
the amendments would not increase the
cost of testing for these pumps.
For pumps that are not currently
within the scope of the test procedure
but are subject to the expansion of scope
adopted by this final rule, use of the
DOE test procedure as amended by this
final rule is not required until the
compliance date of any energy
conservation standards that DOE may
ultimately establish for such pumps as
part of a separate rulemaking assessing
the technological feasibility and
economic justification for such
standards.
The effective date for the amended
test procedures adopted in this final
rule is 30 days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
Representations of energy use or energy
efficiency must be based on testing in
accordance with the amended test
procedures beginning 180 days after the
publication of this final rule. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d))
Discussion of DOE’s actions are
addressed in detail in section III of this
final rule.
III. Discussion
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
A. Scope of Applicability
The current DOE test procedure for
pumps applies to five categories of
‘‘clean water pumps’’ with specific
defined characteristics and excludes
certain defined categories 10 of pumps.
10 CFR 431.464(a)(1).
9 DOE is updating the induction motor
coefficients (see section III.F.2 of this document)
which will change the calculated rating for pumps
sold with induction motors. However, DOE expects
the updated calculations will provide a PEI equal
to or less than that determined using the current
induction motor coefficients. Since the pump
would be considered more efficient, manufacturers
would not have to recertify their basic models,
although they could voluntarily choose to do so. As
such, DOE has determined that the updated
induction motor coefficients will not increase
manufacturer burden.
10 The excluded categories of pumps are fire
pumps; self-priming pumps; prime-assist pumps;
magnet driven pumps; pumps designed to be used
in a nuclear facility subject to 10 CFR part 50,
‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization
Facilities’’; and pumps meeting the design and
construction requirements set forth in Military
Specifications: MIL–P–17639F, ‘‘Pumps,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
DOE defines ‘‘clean water pump’’ as
a pump that is designed for use in
pumping water with a maximum nonabsorbent free solid content of 0.016
pounds per cubic foot, and with a
maximum dissolved solid content of 3.1
pounds per cubic foot, provided that the
total gas content of the water does not
exceed the saturation volume and
disregarding any additives necessary to
prevent the water from freezing at a
minimum of 14 °F. 10 CFR 431.462.
The five categories of clean water
pumps to which the current test
procedure applies are: end-suction
close-coupled (‘‘ESCC’’); end-suction
frame mounted/own bearings (‘‘ESFM’’);
in-line (‘‘IL’’); radially-split, multi-stage,
vertical, in-line diffuser casing (‘‘RSV’’);
and submersible turbine (‘‘ST’’). 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(i). The defined
characteristics specify limits on flow
rate, maximum head, design
temperature range, motor type, bowl
diameter, and speed.11 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(ii). In the context of the
energy conservation standards, pumps
are further delineated into equipment
classes based on nominal speed of
rotation and operating mode (i.e.,
constant load or variable load). 10 CFR
431.465.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed expanding the test procedure
scope to include BB, RSH, RSHIL,
RSHES, SVIL, and VT pumps, as well as
pumps sold with 6-pole induction
motors or motors with design speeds
between 960 rpm and 1,440 rpm; ST
pumps with bowl diameters greater than
6 inches; and end-suction pumps not
covered by the current test procedure.
87 FR 21268, 21272.
The CA IOUs, Efficiency Advocates,
and NEEA supported DOE’s proposal to
Centrifugal, Miscellaneous Service, Naval
Shipboard Use’’ (as amended); MIL–P–17881D,
‘‘Pumps, Centrifugal, Boiler Feed, (Multi-Stage)’’ (as
amended); MIL–P–17840C, ‘‘Pumps, Centrifugal,
Close-Coupled, Navy Standard (For Surface Ship
Application)’’ (as amended); MIL–P–18682D,
‘‘Pump, Centrifugal, Main Condenser Circulating,
Naval Shipboard’’ (as amended); and MIL–P–
18472G, ‘‘Pumps, Centrifugal, Condensate, Feed
Booster, Waste Heat Boiler, And Distilling Plant’’
(as amended). 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(iii).
11 More specifically, these characteristics include:
(A) flow rate of 25 gallons per minute or greater at
best efficiency point (‘‘BEP’’) and full impeller
diameter; (B) maximum head of 459 feet at BEP and
full impeller diameter and the number of stages
required for testing; (C) design temperature range
from 14 to 248 °F; (D) designed to operate with
either (1) a 2- or 4-pole induction motor, or (2) a
non-induction motor with a speed of rotation
operating range that includes speeds of rotation
between 2,880 and 4,320 revolutions per minute
(‘‘rpm’’) and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm, and in either
case, the driver and impeller must rotate at the
same speed; (E) For ST pumps, a 6-inch or smaller
bowl diameter; and (F) For ESCC and ESFM pumps,
a specific speed less than or equal to 5,000 when
calculated using U.S. customary units. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(ii).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
expand the test procedure scope to
include additional pumps. (NEEA, No.
34 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30
at pp. 1–3; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 1)
NEEA commented that sales reported to
its commercial and industrial pumps
efficiency program indicated these
pumps should be included in the scope
of the test procedure and that this
would avoid pumps outside the scope
from competing with regulated pumps
without the costs of complying with the
efficiency standards and labeling
requirements. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2)
HI stated that the proposed scope
expansion could be tested to HI 40.6–
2021 but commented that DOE should
consider the benefits of including larger
pumps, since these pumps are often
sold in much smaller volumes and the
capital and manufacturing impacts will
be disproportionate compared to energy
savings for the current scope. (HI, No.
33 at p. 1) HI also stated that these larger
pumps may require different testing
infrastructure and instrumentation and
that this would require substantial
capital investment for testing. Id.
DOE addresses HI’s comments in the
following sections relative to specific
pump categories. The following sections
also provide additional information and
responses to stakeholder comments
specific to the pumps that DOE
considered for inclusion in the test
procedure scope.
1. Pumps Not Designed for Clean Water
Applications
The scope of the current DOE test
procedure, as described previously,
does not include either chemical
process or wastewater pumps. See 10
CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i). Chemical process
pumps are designed to pump fluids
other than water, and wastewater
pumps are designed for water with a
higher level of free solids than clean
water pumps. In the April 2022 NOPR,
in response to comments received on
the April 2021 RFI, DOE explained that
although certain non-clean water pumps
may be used in clean water
applications, DOE expects the number
of non-clean water pumps used in the
clean water applications to be relatively
small. 87 FR 21268, 21275. DOE noted
that the relevant industry standards do
not provide requirements for testing
pumps designed for non-clean water
applications. Id. To test non-clean water
pumps, DOE would need to reference or
develop an alternate test procedure. Id.
While this test procedure might enable
comparison between non-clean water
pumps, it is unlikely that a clean water
and non-clean water test procedure
would provide comparable results. Id.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Additionally, DOE noted that nonclean water pumps, specifically
wastewater pumps, must meet specific
performance requirements to ensure the
health of the U.S. population. 87 FR
21268, 21275. DOE would need to
carefully evaluate how the performance
of non-clean water pumps could be
impacted by energy conservation
standards and ensure that public health
and safety would not be negatively
affected. Id. As such, additional
investigation would be needed to
understand the market, energy savings
potential, test procedure implications,
and performance requirements of nonclean water pumps (i.e., chemical
process and wastewater). Id. DOE noted
that because ‘‘C-value’’ is specified in
the energy conservation standard (see 10
CFR 431.465(b)(4)) and C-value is
required for determining PEICL and
PEIVL, there would be limited use of the
test procedure without corresponding
standards. Id. Therefore, in the April
2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively
determined to continue to limit the
applicability of the test procedure to
clean water pumps. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
NEEA requested that DOE add ASME
B73 12 compliant pumps in the clean
water definition. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2–
4) NEEA explained that pumps that
meet the requirements of ANSI/ASME
Standard B73.1–2012 or ANSI/ASME
B73.2–2002 are often used in pumping
clean water. Id. NEEA further stated that
these pumps are often advertised as
serving clean water functions and have
been certified for that end use—some for
drinking water components. Since these
pumps overlap and compete directly
with covered pumps in clean water
applications, NEEA argued that they
potentially create a compliance
loophole. Id. NEEA suggested that DOE
no longer consider ASME B73 certified
pumps to be excluded from the clean
water definition and clarified that they
did not believe DOE would need to
change the current or proposed scope of
pumps to do so. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4)
NEEA stated that ending the exclusion
was sufficient, and that in doing so DOE
12 Pumps certified under the ASME B73
designation include: B73.1 (‘‘Specification for
Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps for
Chemical Process’’), B73.2 (‘‘Specification for
Vertical In-Line Centrifugal Pumps for Chemical
Process’’), B73.3 (‘‘Specification for Sealless
Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps for
Chemical Process’’), and B73.5 (‘‘Thermoplastic/
thermoset Polymer Material Horizontal End-suction
Centrifugal Pumps Chemical Process’’). All B73
pumps are designed for use as chemical process
pumps, which have specific design requirements
related to reliability and performance such as
maximum shaft deflections, bearing frame
lubrication, sealing requirements, and vibration
limits.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
would only be including those ASME
B73 certified pumps that advertise as
clean water pumps and compete
directly with clean water pumps. Id.
In response to NEEA, any pump
designed for non-clean water
applications would also be capable of
pumping clean water. However, DOE
notes that the definition of clean water
pump specifies that the pump is
designed for use in pumping [clean
water] (emphasis added). See 10 CFR
431.462. DOE further notes that the
ASME B73 pumps have additional
design requirements for maximum shaft
deflections, bearing frame lubrication,
sealing, and vibration limits because
they are designed for use in chemical
process applications.
Because of the additional design
requirements applicable to ASME B73
pumps, it is unlikely that a
manufacturer of clean water pumps
would certify to ASME B73 as a way to
avoid DOE energy conservation
standards. DOE market research
indicates that the prices of ASME B73
pumps are typically substantially higher
than the clean water pumps that are
included in this rulemaking,
presumably due to these additional
design requirements. Therefore, DOE
does not expect end users to specifically
purchase ASME B73 pumps for use as
replacements for clean water pumps
currently covered by DOE energy
conservation standards. Finally, DOE is
not aware of ASME B73 pumps being
distributed in commerce as substitutes
for clean water pumps to any significant
degree. Given these considerations, DOE
is not amending the definition of clean
water pump to specifically include
pumps certified under the ASME B73
designation in this rulemaking.
The Efficiency Advocates encouraged
DOE to investigate ways to accelerate
adoption of variable speed drives
(‘‘VSDs’’) in nonclean water
applications, stating that pumps in
chemical and wastewater sectors are
estimated to use more than 27 and 17
TWh/yr of electricity respectively.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 4)
They cited a 2020 study by NEEA
showing that VSDs provided average
energy savings of 23 percent and 43
percent for constant- and variable-load
clean water pumping applications,
respectively. Id. The Efficiency
Advocates concluded from this study
that there are significant potential
savings from using VSDs, noting that
wastewater flow can vary significantly
over time and may benefit especially. Id.
Efficiency Advocates encouraged DOE
to develop the test procedure for VSDs
in non-clean water applications in order
to facilitate greater market adoption of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17939
VSDs in wastewater and chemical
process pumps and capture the
potential energy-savings benefits.
In response to the Efficiency
Advocates, DOE reiterates its discussion
in the April 2022 NOPR that DOE
expects the number of non-clean water
pumps used in the clean water
applications to be relatively small; that
the scope of HI 40.6–2014, which is
currently incorporated by reference into
the DOE test procedure, includes clean
water pumps only, and that it is
unlikely that a clean water and nonclean water test procedure would
provide comparable results. 87 FR
21268, 21275. DOE emphasizes that
waste water pumps, in particular, are
required to pump slurries/solids. DOE is
incorporating by reference HI 40.6–
2021, which is only applicable to clean
water pumps. If DOE were to include
waste water and other clean water
pumps in its scope of coverage, it would
need to evaluate the applicability and
repeatability of industry test procedures
for these pumps. DOE has not had an
opportunity to appropriately evaluate
these test procedures or conduct its own
testing on non-clean water pumps
during this test procedure rulemaking;
however, DOE may consider evaluating
these pumps in a future rulemaking.
In summary, the scope of the test
procedure as amended by this final rule
continues to exclude both chemical
process and wastewater pumps.
Regarding VSDs, DOE notes that its
current test procedure accommodates
pumps with variable speed operation by
providing calculations for determining
variable load PEI (‘‘PEIVL’’). (See
Appendix A to subpart Y of part 431.)
However, as discussed, DOE is
continuing to exclude wastewater
pumps from the scope of the test
procedure.
2. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
As discussed, the scope of the current
DOE test procedure is limited to five
categories of pumps designed for clean
water applications. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(i). One of these categories
is IL pumps, which are limited to a shaft
input power greater than or equal to 1
hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at
best efficiency point (‘‘BEP’’) 13 and full
impeller diameter, and in which liquid
is discharged in a plane perpendicular
to the impeller shaft. 10 CFR 431.462. In
2016, a Circulator Pump Working
Group 14 recommended a test procedure
13 BEP is the pump hydraulic power operating
point (consisting of both flow and head conditions)
that results in the maximum efficiency.
14 On February 3, 2016, DOE published its
intention to establish a working group under the
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
Continued
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
17940
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
and energy conservation standard for
circulator pumps, which DOE is
addressing in a separate rulemaking,
and also made recommendations for
SVIL pumps. SVIL pumps have
characteristics identical to those for inline pumps except SVIL pumps have
shaft input power of less than 1 hp. The
Circulator Pump Working Group
recommended that (1) SVIL pumps be
evaluated using the PEICL or PEIVL
metric, and (2) SVIL pumps should be
tested using the DOE commercial and
industrial pump test procedure, with
any needed modifications determined
by DOE. (Docket No. EERE–2016–BT–
STD–0004, No. 58 Recommendation
#1B at pp. 1–2).
In the April 2022 NOPR, consistent
with the Circulator Pump Working
Group recommendation, DOE proposed
to include SVIL pumps in the pump test
procedure scope as an extension of IL
pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21275–21276.
DOE tentatively determined that SVIL
pumps can be tested using the current
DOE pumps test procedure with certain
additional modifications. The metric
and test procedure for SVIL pumps are
discussed in sections III.D and III.G of
this notice. Moreover, DOE stated in the
April 2022 NOPR that it expects that
including SVIL pumps in the pumps
test procedure would reduce confusion
over which inline pumps are and are
not subject to energy conservation
standards. Id. DOE requested comment
on its proposal to expand the scope of
the test procedure to cover SVIL pumps.
HI, NEEA, the CA IOUs, and the
Efficiency Advocates agreed with
including SVIL pumps in the scope of
the test procedure, and Grundfos agreed
that SVILs should be an extension of IL
pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 2; NEEA, No.
34 at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2;
Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2–
3; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1) Grundfos
also commented that it sells a small
number of SVIL pumps without a motor,
but it does not believe that SVILs sold
without motors should be excluded
from the regulation. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 4)
Due to the overlap between SVILs and
circulators, NEEA and the CA IOUs
expressed support for the development
of standards to ensure that efficiencies
of both are comparable. (NEEA, No. 34
at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2) NEEA
stated their finding that 12 percent of IL
pumps (excluding circulator pumps) are
less than 1 hp, and that SVILs are
Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal
Advisory Committee (‘‘ASRAC’’) to negotiate a test
procedure and energy conservation standards for
circulator pumps. 81 FR 5658. Throughout this
document, this working group is referred to as the
‘‘Circulator Pump Working Group’’.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
therefore an important and overlapping
segment of the market. (NEEA, No. 34 at
p. 4) NEEA stated that it believes
broadening the scope to include SVILs
will help to avoid market confusion or
gaps in coverage. Id.
For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs and in the April
2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its
proposal to include SVILs in the scope
of the test procedure. DOE finalizes a
definition for SVIL pumps in section
III.B.4 of this document. In response to
Grundfos’ comment, DOE’s finalized
test procedure, as discussed in section
III.G, incudes methods to test SVILs
both with and without motors. DOE will
address the development of standards
separately in the ongoing pumps energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
3. Other Clean Water Pump Categories
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to expand the current test
procedure’s scope to include additional
clean water pumps. 87 FR 21268,
21276–21279. The following sections
discuss DOE’s consideration of
additional pump categories in the scope
of the test procedure.
a. Between-Bearing Pumps
Section 1.2.9.2 of ANSI–HI 14.1–14.2–
2019 describes between-bearing pumps
as pumps that are one- or two-stage,
axially-split, mounted to a baseplate,
driven by a motor via a flexible
coupling, and with bearings on both
ends of the rotating assembly.
Based on a review of the market, BB
pumps are generally larger than the
pumps currently subject to the DOE test
procedure. Many BB pumps exceed the
head and horsepower limits in the
current DOE test procedure.
Additionally, BB pumps are not
typically designed for clean water
applications. Despite these generalities,
DOE has identified certain clean water
BB pumps under 200 hp and 459 feet of
head that could be viewed as potentially
interchangeable with pumps that are
currently included in the scope of the
current DOE test procedure.
To address the potential for pumps
that provide unregulated alternatives to
the pumps currently subject to the DOE
test procedure, DOE proposed to
include BB pumps within the scope of
the DOE test procedure in the April
2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21277.
However, DOE did not propose to
expand scope beyond clean water
pumps, and did not propose to expand
the head or horsepower limitations
currently listed in 10 CFR 431.464(1)(ii).
Id. DOE noted that while many BB
pumps exceed the test procedure’s head
or horsepower limitations, an expansion
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
of the current head and horsepower
restrictions has the potential to increase
test burden by requiring larger
laboratory equipment to test pumps
according to the DOE test procedure and
most of the larger BB pumps were not
designed for clean water. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
the CA IOUs, the Efficiency Advocates,
and Grundfos supported DOE’s proposal
to expand the test procedure scope to
include BB pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at
p. 3; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp.
2–3; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1) The CA
IOUs commented that BB pumps are
high-cost, low-sale pumps and that they
anticipate BB pumps will be larger, with
motor horsepower of 100 or over. (CA
IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) The CA IOUs also
cited industry literature indicating that
efficiency can be improved by balancing
the impeller forces in BB pumps. Id.
HI disagreed that BB1 15 pumps are
commercially acceptable replacements
for currently regulated pumps due to
design and cost considerations. (HI, No.
33 at p. 2) HI stated that the price for
a BB1 pump compared to a currently
regulated pump would be two times or
more. Id. Despite supporting DOE’s
proposal to include BB pumps in the
test procedure scope, Grundfos stated
that it expects testing these pumps will
increase test burden because of their
large size, larger motor sizes required for
test, and the potential for additional test
fixtures. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1)
Based on stake holder comments,
feedback from manufacturer interviews,
and additional reviews of product
literature, DOE has determined that BB
pumps do not serve as replacements for
pumps currently covered by the DOE
test procedure. For a given load point,
a BB pump will be larger, heavier, and
more expensive than an equivalent end
suction pump. Therefore, it is making it
very unlikely that customers would
choose to replace a regulated end
suction pump with an unregulated BB
pump. Additionally, DOE has
determined that manufacturers of BB
pumps would likely need to build new
test stands to test their BB products
using the DOE test procedure. DOE
notes that because most BB pumps are
outside of the DOE test procedure scope,
due to their flow and head exceeding
the maximum flow and head set by
DOE. Therefore, if DOE were to include
BB pumps in this test procedure, BB
pump manufacturers would need to
make substantial capital investments to
test and certify a very small number of
15 BB1 pumps are a pump class defined by HI
14.1–14.2–2019 that are 1 and 2 stage, axially-split
pumps with the impeller(s) mounted between
bearings at either end. BB1 pumps are a specific
sub-category of BB pumps.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
pumps. This would result in a test cost
per basic model that is as much as 100
times higher than DOE’s estimate
presented in the April 2022 NOPR. 87
FR 21268, 21309. Test costs are
discussed in more detail in section
III.K.1. Since customers are not
expected to use BB pumps as
replacements for end suction pumps
and test burden for BB pump
manufacturers would be very high
relative to the number of pumps tested,
DOE has determined that the potential
benefits of including BB pumps within
the scope of this test procedure are
outweighed by the burdens associated
with testing and certifying such
products. As such, in this final rule DOE
is not including BB pumps within the
scope of this test procedure.
b. Vertical Turbine Pumps
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE tentatively determined that ST
pumps and VT pumps have similar end
uses. 87 FR 21268, 21277. Additionally,
DOE tentatively determined that ST and
VT pumps have similar bowl and
impeller assemblies, and that VT pumps
may even share an identical assembly
with an ST pump produced by the same
manufacturer. Id. To address the
potential for pumps that provide
unregulated alternatives to the pumps
currently subject to the DOE test
procedure, DOE proposed in the April
2022 NOPR to include VT pumps, with
no limit on bowl diameter for inclusion
in the DOE test procedure. Id.
In response to DOE’s proposal in the
April 2022 NOPR, the Efficiency
Advocates expressed support for DOE’s
scope expansion to cover VT pumps.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2–
3) The CA IOUs commended DOE for
including VT pumps and asserted that
regulating equipment used for accessing
groundwater in irrigation applications is
important because at least 30 percent of
the wells in Texas and California use VT
pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2)
HI stated that expanding the test
procedure scope to include VT pumps
would add a substantial burden for
manufacturers who will have to test
low-speed and large-diameter pumps.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 3) HI continued by
stating that these large-diameter VT
pumps may be assembled and tested on
site, and that manufacturers may or may
not have the capacity to test VT pumps
in their test facilities. Id.
DOE is finalizing its proposal to
include VT pumps in the pumps test
procedure scope. However, DOE is not
adopting its proposal to include these
pumps without a limit on bowl
diameter, and is instead limiting the
scope of VT pumps to bowl diameters
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
less than or equal to six inches,
consistent with the existing test
procedure and energy conservation
standards size limitation for ST pumps.
HI indicated that expanding bowl
diameter to greater than 6 inches for VT
and ST pumps may have a significant
impact on manufacturer test burden.
DOE expects test time and cost for VT
pumps with bowl diameters less than or
equal to 6 inches is equivalent to that
for ST pumps with bowl diameters less
than or equal to 6 inches because of the
similar physical characteristics and
hydraulic properties for these pump
classes. DOE’s determination to exclude
VT and ST pumps with bowl diameters
greater than 6 inches is discussed in
more detail in section III.A.4.a. of this
document.
Based on its review of pump literature
and pump schematics, DOE has
determined that the current DOE test
procedure based on HI 40.6–2021 is
applicable to VT pumps and that
therefore VT pumps can be easily added
to the scope of the DOE test procedure.
In addition, including provisions for VT
pumps in the DOE test procedure will
give consumers the ability to easily
compare the efficiency of different VT
and ST pump models serving similar
applications. Lastly, creating a uniform
test procedure and rating method for VT
pumps will enable DOE to consider
establishing energy conservation
standards for these pumps. The
definition for VT pumps is discussed in
section III.B.6 of this document. DOE
addresses the question of test burden in
section III.K.1.a. of this document.
c. Radially-Split Multi-Stage Horizontal
Pumps
The current DOE test procedure
includes RSV pumps, but does not
include RSH pumps, which are also
multistage pumps used primarily in
heating, cooling, and pressure boosting
applications.
DOE has surveyed pump and endproduct materials and literature
available online and has concluded that
RSV and RSH pumps are marketed for
similar applications, and that RSH
pumps could be substituted for RSV
pumps and may provide a regulatory
loophole to RSV pumps. Additionally,
DOE determined that RSH pumps can
be tested using the current DOE test
procedure. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE proposed to include RSH pumps
with both in-line (‘‘RSHIL’’) and endsuction (‘‘RSHES’’) flow configurations
in its test procedure scope. 87 FR 21268,
21278.
In response to the proposal to include
RSH pumps in the test procedure scope,
Grundfos stated that it agrees with
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17941
adding RSHES pumps to the scope but
requested additional information
regarding which products meet the
definitions and whether they should be
considered under a single pump
category. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2) The
Efficiency Advocates supported DOE
expanding its test procedure scope to
include RSHIL and RSHES
configurations. (Efficiency Advocates,
No. 30 at pp. 2–3) HI commented that
the addition of RSH pumps will add
manufacturer test burden. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 3)
DOE has determined that the current
DOE test procedure based on HI 40.6–
2021 is applicable to RSH pumps, and
that therefore RSH pumps can be easily
added to the scope of the DOE test
procedure. In addition, including
provisions for RSH pumps in the DOE
test procedure will give consumers the
ability to easily compare the efficiency
of different RSH and RSV pump models.
Lastly, creating a uniform test procedure
and rating method for RSH pumps will
enable DOE to consider establishing
energy conservation standards for these
pumps. DOE is finalizing its proposal to
include RSH pumps, specifically RSHIL
and RSHES pumps, in the scope of the
DOE test procedure. Definitions for
RSH, RSHES, and RSHIL are discussed
in section III.B.7 of this document. DOE
addresses the question of test burden in
section III.K.1.a. of this document.
d. End-Suction Pumps Similar to ESFM
and ESCC Pumps
DOE defines a ‘‘close-coupled pump’’
as a pump having a motor shaft that also
serves as the impeller shaft, and defines
a ‘‘mechanically-coupled pump’’ as a
pump that has its own impeller shaft
and bearings separate from the motor
shaft. 10 CFR 431.462. As discussed in
the April 2021 RFI, DOE is aware that
certain pumps may have their own
shaft, but with no bearings to support
that shaft. 86 FR 20075, 20078.
Additionally, while the close-coupled
pump definition describes a pump in
which the motor shaft also serves as the
pump shaft, the definition does not
provide detail on how the motor and
pump shaft may be connected. DOE has
observed that some manufacturers
describe close-coupled pumps as using
an adapter to mount the impeller
directly to the motor shaft. The coupling
type is the only differentiator between
ESCC pumps, which are ‘‘close-coupled
pumps,’’ and ESFM pumps, which are
‘‘mechanically-coupled pumps.’’ In the
January 2016 Final Rule, DOE noted that
it intended for ESFM and ESCC pumps
to be mutually exclusive to ensure that
pumps that are close-coupled to the
motor and have a single impeller and
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17942
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
motor shaft would be part of the ESCC
equipment category, while all other endsuction pumps that are mechanicallycoupled to the motor and for which the
bare pump and motor have separate
shafts would be part of the ESFM
equipment category. 81 FR 4086, 4096.
Despite this intention, DOE is aware
that these definitions may have
excluded some end-suction pumps from
the test procedure scope.
In the April 2022 NOPR, based on
comment responses from the April 2021
RFI and DOE’s review of ESCC and
ESFM pumps, DOE tentatively
determined that there is a group of endsuction pumps that do not currently fall
into either the ESFM or ESCC
definition, but which may be
competitors to the currently regulated
pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21278. Therefore,
in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
to ensure that all clean water endsuction pumps are covered by the test
procedure by revising the definitions of
ESFM and ESCC pumps. Id. DOE
tentatively determined that no test
procedure revisions would be needed to
accommodate these additional endsuction pumps. Id.
In response to DOE’s proposal in the
April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos and the
Efficiency Advocates expressed support
for revising the ESFM and ESCC
definitions to include additional endsuction pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
2; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2–
3)
For the reasons discussed in the April
2022 NOPR and in the preceding
paragraphs, DOE is including all endsuction pumps within the coverage of
this test procedure by modifying the
definitions of ESFM and ESCC pumps.
e. Line Shaft and Cantilever Pumps
ANSI/HI Standard 14.1–14.2–2019,
‘‘American National Standard for
Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature
and Definitions’’ (ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–
2019’’) includes design criteria for
different pump configurations, and
section 14.1.3.3.1.3 describes vertically
separate discharge sump pumps, a
category of pump that includes line
shaft (‘‘VS4’’) pumps and cantilever
(‘‘VS5’’) pumps. Both VS4 and VS5
pumps are vertically-suspended pumps
with a single casing and with a
discharge column that is separate from
the shaft column. The pump equipment
categories defined by DOE do not
explicitly reference VS4 or VS5 pumps,
and some pumps may be covered by
both the DOE definition of an ESFM
pump and the HI definition of a VS4 or
VS5 pump. 86 FR 20075, 20079.
DOE addressed comments on the
April 2021 RFI regarding these pumps
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268,
21278. DOE discussed that some line
shaft pumps may already be within the
test procedure scope but are defined as
ESFM pumps. Id. Additionally, DOE
noted that cantilever pumps are
primarily designed for non-clean water
applications, including liquids and
slurries containing large solids. Id. DOE
did not propose to include line shaft or
cantilever pumps in the test procedure
scope in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
21268, 21279.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
the Efficiency Advocates further
encouraged DOE to consider coverage
for both cantilever and line shaft
pumps, stating that some of these
pumps have similar designs to ESFM
and ESCC pumps and some are
marketed for pumping clean water.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 3–
4)
DOE notes that most or all clean water
line shaft and cantilever pumps are
already covered by the ES definition.
DOE does not believe there is a
significant amount of clean water
cantilever and line shaft pumps, as
these pumps are primarily designed for
non-clean water applications including
liquids and slurries that contain large
solids. As discussed, DOE is not
expanding the scope to include nonclear water pumps.
4. Scope Limitations
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also
proposed to remove bowl diameter
limitations for certain pumps, include
an additional nominal speed of 1200
rpm, and decrease horsepower
requirements for IL pumps. 87 FR
21268, 21279. DOE also proposed to
clarify pump design temperature range.
Id. The following sections summarize
each of these topics.
a. Submersible Turbine Pumps With
Bowl Diameter Greater Than 6 Inches
As discussed previously, the scope of
the current DOE test procedure includes
ST pumps with a bowl diameter of 6
inches or smaller. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(i)(E) and (a)(1)(ii)(E).
DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to include VT pumps within the
scope of the DOE test procedure. 87 FR
21268, 21279. DOE did not propose a
bowl diameter limitation for VT pumps
in the April 2022 NOPR. VT pumps are
similar in design to ST pumps and
commenters had indicated that the two
pump categories can be used in
overlapping applications. Id. Therefore,
to maintain consistency across VT and
ST pump categories, DOE also proposed
to remove the 6-inch bowl diameter
limitation for ST pumps. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
the CA IOUs and the Efficiency
Advocates supported including ST
pumps with a bowl diameter greater
than six inches. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p.
3; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 3)
The CA IOUs also provided
supplemental data to support the
inclusion of ST pumps with bowl
diameters greater than six inches. (CA
IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3–5, 7) They found
that 21 percent of California wells, and
36 percent of Texas wells had an
estimated nominal bowl size between
eight and twelve inches. Id. at 5.
China recommended that DOE retain
the 6-inch maximum bowl diameter
restriction for ST pumps to avoid the
high cost of testing larger ST pumps.
(China, No. 29 at p. 4)
Grundfos stated that all of its products
with bowl diameters greater than 6
inches would be excluded from the
regulation due to the head limitation
(i.e., less than or equal to 459 feet);
however, it commented that increasing
the maximum bowl diameter would
have minimal impact on energy use and
suggested that DOE instead evaluate
how ST pumps with larger bowl
diameters may be evaluated in a future
rulemaking. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2)
HI encouraged DOE to define how
bowl size would be determined for a ST
pump when the bowl diameter varies
among stages. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4) HI also
stated that since DOE has proposed to
expand the size of ST pumps and
include all sizes of VT pumps, DOE
should clarify that its scope is limited
to a specific speed of 5,000 in U.S.
customary units for these pumps. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 1) Additionally, HI
recommended that DOE update the text
in 431.464 (a)(1)(iii)(E) as follows: For
ST, VT, ESCC and ESFM pumps, a
specific speed less than or equal to
5,000 when calculated using U.S.
customary units. Id.
In response to HI’s comment on
determining bowl size when bowl
diameter varies between stages, DOE
clarifies that where bowl diameter
varies among stages, the minimum bowl
diameter of a ST or VT pump would be
considered the appropriate
measurement.
Based on additional evaluation and
the feedback it received from
stakeholders, DOE has determined that
manufacturers of VT and ST pumps
with bowl diameters larger then 6
inches would likely need to build new
test stands to test these products using
the DOE test procedure. DOE notes that
because many VT and ST pumps with
bowl diameters larger then 6 inches are
outside of the DOE test procedure scope
because their head exceeds the
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
maximum set by DOE. Therefore, if DOE
were to include these pumps in its test
procedure, pump manufacturers would
need to make substantial capital
investments to test and certify a very
small number of in-scope pumps. This
would result in a test cost per basic
model that is as much as 100 times
higher than the estimates DOE
presented in the April 2022 NOPR. 87
FR 21268, 21309. Test costs are
discussed in more details in section
III.K.1 of this document. Since test
burden for VT and ST pump
manufacturers would be very high
relative to the number of pumps tested,
DOE has determined that the potential
benefits of including VT and ST pumps
with bowl diameters larger than 6
inches within the scope of this test
procedure are outweighed by the
burdens associated with testing and
certifying such products. Therefore,
DOE is maintaining the 6-inch bowl
diameter limitation for ST pumps and
specifying a maximum bowl diameter of
6 inches for VT pumps in this final rule.
b. Pumps Designed To Be Operated at
1,200 RPM
As discussed, DOE limits the scope of
pumps under the current test procedure
to those designed to operate with a 2or 4-pole induction motor, or a noninduction motor with an operating range
that includes speeds of rotation between
2,880 and 4,320 rpm and/or 1,440 and
2,160 rpm. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D).
In either case, the driver and impeller
must rotate at the same speed. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). The current DOE
test procedure does not include pumps
designed to operate with 6-pole
induction motors, or with noninduction motors that have a speed-ofrotation operating range exclusively
outside the ranges defined.
Based on a review of pump
performance curves available online,
DOE found that unregulated pumps
tested with a nominal speed of 1,200
rpm are often part of the same pump
families as those pumps that currently
fall within the scope of the DOE test
procedure.16 87 FR 21268, 21279. To
ensure equitable treatment among these
pumps, DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to extend the scope of this test
procedure to cover pumps designed to
operate with 6-pole induction motors,
and pumps designed to operate with
non-induction motors with an operating
range that includes speeds of rotation
between 960 rpm and 1,440 rpm.17 Id.
16 See www.regulations.gov/document/EERE2020-BT-TP-0032-0024. (Docket No. EERE–2020–
BT–TP–0032–0024.)
17 960 and 1440 rpm are ±20 percent of 1,200
rpm. The acceptable non-induction motor ranges for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
DOE proposed test provisions to
accommodate these pumps in the April
2022 NOPR and requested comment on
its proposal. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
the CA IOUs and the Efficiency
Advocates supported DOE including 6pole motors. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3;
Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 3)
The CA IOUs stated that 6-pole clean
water pumps often have operating
ranges that compete with 4-pole pumps.
(CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) Grundfos
agreed that 6-pole pumps should be
considered but questioned whether
doing so would achieve the energy
savings that DOE anticipates, and
observed that 6-pole pumps have much
smaller sales numbers compared to less
expensive 4-pole pumps for a similar
duty point. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5).
After review of stakeholder feedback,
and for the reasons discussed above,
DOE is extending the scope of this test
procedure to cover pumps designed to
operate with 6-pole induction motors.
DOE may evaluate potential energy
savings for these pumps in a future
energy conservation standard.
In terms of operating range, Grundfos
urged DOE to ensure that the operating
ranges for 6-pole and 4-pole pumps
designed to operate with non-induction
motors are independent from each
other. Grundfos additionally
recommended setting the maximum
operating range for 6-pole pumps
designed to operate with non-induction
motors at 1,439 rpm since the lower end
of the operating range is 1,440 rpm for
4-pole pumps designed to operate with
non-induction motors. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 2, 5) Similarly, HI
recommended that DOE change the
maximum operating speed for 6-pole
pumps designed to operate with noninduction motors from 1,440 rpm to
1,439 rpm to provide a clear delineation
between the operating range for 4-pole
pumps designed to operate with noninduction motors (i.e., 1,440 rpm to
2,160 rpm). (HI, No. 33 at p. 5)
DOE agrees that the operating ranges
for 2-, 4-, and 6-pole pumps designed to
operate with a non-induction motor
should be separate from each other and
not overlap. In consideration of
stakeholder feedback, DOE is modifying
the maximum operating speed for a 6pole pump designed to operate with a
non-induction motor from 960 rpm to
1,400 rpm as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to greater than or equal to 960
rpm and less than 1,440 rpm. In
summary, in this final rule, DOE is
including clean water pumps designed
1800 and 3600 rpm pumps are also ±20 percent of
the nominal value.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17943
to operate with a 6-pole induction motor
or a non-induction motor with a speed
of rotation operating range greater than
or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440
rpm.
Grundfos also commented that adding
the 6-pole speed highlights a point of
unnecessary testing burden around the
defined ‘‘operating ranges’’ with respect
to variable speed equipment. (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 2) According to Grundfos,
a variable speed product with a motor
designed for 4,000 rpm can technically
operate at speeds across all three
defined ‘‘ranges,’’ and current
regulations require testing at all three
nominal speeds. Id. However, Grundfos
stated that a product with a 4,000 rpm
design speed will likely perform only in
a single operating range defined by
DOE. Id. Grundfos asserted that
consumers are more likely to purchase
a less expensive pump with a smaller
horsepower range than run a 4,000 rpm
pump at 1,800 rpm. Id. Therefore,
Grundfos recommended the DOE
consider updating its language to state
that variable load equipment should be
tested at the nominal speed nearest the
speed identified on the pump
nameplate. Id.
DOE notes that section I.C.1 in
appendix A specifies how to determine
the nominal speed of rotation for
testing. For instance, for pumps sold
with 4-pole induction motors, the
nominal speed of rotation shall be 1,800
rpm. (See section I.C.1.2) For 4-pole
pumps designed for use with noninduction motors where the operating
range of the pump and motor includes
speeds of rotation between 1,440 rpm
and 2,160 rpm, the nominal speed for
test would be 1,800 rpm. (See section
I.C.1.5) Whether the pump is sold with
variable speed capability is immaterial,
as the determination of nominal test
speed is based solely on where the
pump is designed to operate. DOE notes
that, to determine the range of speeds
that a pump is designed to operate
within, DOE would refer to published
data, marketing literature, and other
publicly available information. This
would include the pump nameplate. If
the range of speeds a pump is designed
to operate within crosses two or more
categories, manufacturers must test and
certify at each relevant nominal speed.
c. Pump Horsepower and Design Speed
As previously discussed, the current
test procedure includes only ESFM,
ESCC, IL, RSV, and ST pumps, each of
which is limited by its respective
definition to those with shaft input
power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
17944
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
full impeller diameter. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(i); 10 CFR 431.462.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
discussed comments that some pumps
sold with electronically commutated
motors (‘‘ECMs’’) and intended to run at
higher speeds, such as 4,320 rpm, must
be normalized to rate at 3,600 rpm. 87
FR 21268, 21279–21280. This
adjustment causes the power of the
motor to fall below 1 hp, meaning the
pump is therefore out of scope. Id. As
stated previously, the pump definitions
reference horsepower limitations based
on shaft input power at BEP and full
impeller diameter. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE
defines ‘‘BEP’’ as the pump hydraulic
power operating point (consisting of
both flow and head conditions) that
results in maximum efficiency, and
defines ‘‘full impeller diameter’’ as the
maximum impeller diameter with
which a given pump basic model is
distributed in commerce. 10 CFR
431.462. DOE’s test procedure for
pumps at appendix A also includes test
provisions for determining both BEP
and pump input power (also known as
shaft input power), as well as provisions
for normalizing all measured data to the
specified nominal speed of rotation. As
such, while the definitions themselves
do not specify that shaft input power is
determined at nominal speed, DOE
understands that the pump definitions
could be interpreted to exclude pumps
with shaft input power greater than or
equal to 1 HP at BEP at their design
speed, but less than 1 HP when tested
and corrected to nominal speed. In
addition, DOE understands that the
value of maximum efficiency varies
little with speed, and is often assumed
to be constant, and as such the
definition of BEP alone would not be
sufficient to assume that it must be
determined at a certain speed different
from that in the test procedure.
However, DOE also notes that it is
expanding the current test procedure
scope to include SVIL pumps, which
will address this issue. Specifically,
SVIL pumps are fractional horsepower
pumps, so even when corrected to
nominal speed, the pumps in question
would be included in scope. DOE
understands that use of high frequency
(i.e., 4,000 rpm) ECMs is likely more
prevalent on SVILs than on other pumps
in this horsepower range, particularly as
a result of their applications and
competition with the circulator market.
This means that including SVILs in this
test procedure includes most, if not all,
pumps where motor power decreases
below 1 hp when rated at BEP. For these
reasons, DOE did not propose to change
the specified horsepower limitations
within the pump category definitions in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268,
21280.
DOE requested comment on its
tentative determination that including
SVILs in the test procedure scope will
largely eliminate the issue of higher
speed 1 hp pumps falling out of scope
when they rate at a nominal speed of
3,600 rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21273.
Grundfos and HI both agreed with
DOE’s determination. (Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 3; HI, No. 33 at p. 3)
For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs and in the April
2022 NOPR, DOE is maintaining the 1
hp limitations in the ESFM, ESFC, IL,
RSV, and ST pump definitions, and is
including the 1 hp limitation in its
definitions for RSH, and VT pumps.
d. Pumps Over 200 HP
As previously discussed, the current
test procedure includes only ESFM,
ESCC, IL, RSV, and ST pumps. Each of
these classes is limited by its respective
definition to those pumps with shaft
input power greater than or equal to 1
hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at
BEP and full impeller diameter. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(i); 10 CFR 431.462.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
the Efficiency Advocates encouraged
DOE to expand the test procedure scope
to include pumps greater than 200 hp,
and stated that motors between 201 and
500 hp are the most consumptive motor
size group in industrial electricity
consumption. (Efficiency Advocates,
No. 32 at p. 3) The Efficiency Advocates
further commented that the current
calculation methods and DOE’s
proposal to allow alternative efficiency
determination methods (AEDMs) in lieu
of physical testing would help mitigate
test burden associated with these larger
pumps. Id.
DOE notes in response that pumps
with shaft input powers over 200 hp
generally require larger, more
expensive, test stands and testing
facilities. Additionally, these pumps are
often ‘‘engineered-to-order’’, resulting in
many different basic models. These two
factors would lead to significantly
higher per- model test costs than for
pumps with shaft input powers below
200 hp. AEDMs and the calculation
methods in the DOE test procedure for
pumps may alleviate some testing
burden, but neither completely negate
the need for physical testing of bare
pumps which drives the higher testing
burden above 200 hp. At this time, DOE
has determined that expanding the
pumps test procedure to include pumps
with shaft powers greater than 200 hp
would be too burdensome to pump
manufacturers. DOE may re-evaluate
this decision in a future rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
e. Horsepower and Number of Stages for
Testing
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
discussed how to handle certification of
equipment when some models are
regulated, and others are not. 87 FR
21268, 21280. DOE provided an
example of an RSV basic model sold
with a 1 hp motor tested at 3 stages,
which is in scope, and an RSV model
that is 2-stage with a 0.75 hp motor. Id.
Since the latter pump uses a 0.75 hp
motor, it is partially out of scope. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
it understands that the same model of
RSV pump may be sold with two stages,
three stages, or some other number of
stages. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE’s RSV
pump definition includes those pumps
that have a shaft input power greater
than or equal to 1 hp and less than or
equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller
diameter and at the number of stages
required for testing. 10 CFR 431.462.
DOE’s testing provisions for RSV pumps
in section C.2 of appendix A specify
that the number of stages required for
testing is three, or, if the basic model is
only available with fewer than three
stages, the basic model is tested with the
maximum number of stages with which
it is distributed in commerce in the
United States. Therefore, in the previous
example, the RSV pump model sold
with 2 or 3 stages would be included in
the scope of the test procedure (and
standards) if it had a shaft input power
greater than or equal to 1 hp when
tested at 3 stages, and the resulting PEI
would apply to all stages with which
the pump model is sold. 87 FR 21268,
21280. DOE did not propose to modify
this language in the April 2022 NOPR.
Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
Grundfos stated that it disagrees with
DOE’s interpretation of the regulation.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 11) Grundfos
explained that the definition for a basic
model states that a manufacturer cannot
group equipment using DOE-regulated
motors with equipment using motors
under 1 hp, and therefore, the
manufacturer would have two basic
models, one with pumps at 1 to 200 hp
and a second for pumps under 1 hp. Id.
Grundfos added that the second basic
model would not be in scope since RSV
pumps with motors under 1 hp are not
included in the test procedure scope. Id.
Additionally, Grundfos commented that
the same equipment sold as a bare
pump would be considered a single
basic model regardless of the number of
stages and shaft power. Id.
DOE notes that the basic model
definition in 10 CFR 431.462 states that
all variations in the number of stages of
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
bare RSV and ST pumps must be
considered a single basic model. The
definition also states that for pumps
sold with different motors, the motors
must be in the same motor efficiency
band to be considered a single basic
model, referencing Table 3 in appendix
A. However, Table 3 does not provide
motor efficiencies for fractional
horsepower motors. Additionally,
section I.C.2 of appendix A specifies the
number of stages for testing RSV and ST
pumps. DOE acknowledges that this
leaves multi-stage pumps sold with
fractional horsepower motors out of
scope of this test procedure, whereas
equivalent pumps that include the
specified number of stages for testing
are included within scope of this test
procedure. This distinction applies only
for pumps sold with motors and does
not affect bare pumps, in which DOE’s
original interpretation still stands.
f. Design Temperature Range
The current scope for the pumps test
procedure is limited to pumps with a
design temperature range between and
including 14 to 248 °F. This range was
derived from the original negotiation
term sheet for pumps, which
recommended limiting the scope to
pumps with a design range from ¥10 °C
to 120 °C. (Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–
NOC–0039–0092). For the purposes of
its regulations, DOE translated this
range to Fahrenheit. DOE has received
inquires as to whether a pump marketed
for temperatures up to 250 °F is outside
of the current test procedure’s scope. In
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated it
reviewed marketing materials for a
number of pumps and found that
common upper limits of temperature are
212, 225, 248, 250, and 300 °F. 87 FR
21268, 21280. Some marketing materials
stated that standard seals may have one
high temperature limit while optional
seals provide a higher limit (typically
250 or 300 °F). Id. DOE noted it
understood that the original intent of
the scope limitation was to exclude
pumps designed exclusively for low or
high temperatures from the test
procedure. Id. However, if a
manufacturer is offering a pump model
across all temperature ranges to
minimize SKUs, rather than offering
separate low temperature and high
temperature models, such a pump
model should be subject to the
regulations. Id. DOE explained that only
pumps designed and marketed for
temperatures exclusively outside the
range of DOE’s scope would be
excluded from the test procedure and
energy conservation standards. Id.
DOE also discussed that rounding to
a temperature limit of 250 °F when
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
translating from °C to °F would be
preferable to using the exact value of
248 °F since manufacturers commonly
use rounded temperature values in their
marketing materials. Id. Similarly, DOE
discussed that it would be preferable to
round the lower temperature limit from
14 °F to 15 °F. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to clarify its design
temperature limits to include equipment
that is designed for operation at
temperatures that fall into any part of
the range from 15 to 250 °F. 87 FR
21268, 21280. DOE requested comment
on this clarification and on DOE’s
recommendation to shift the design
temperature range from 14 °F to 248 °F
to 15 °F to 250 °F. Id.
In response, Grundfos agreed with
DOE’s intention to clarify the
temperature ranges. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 3) HI stated that it does not expect the
temperature adjustment to have a
significant impact (HI, No. 33 at p. 3)
For the reasons discussed previously,
DOE is finalizing its proposed
clarifications to the design temperature
range which includes pumps with a
design temperature inclusive of any part
of the range from 15 °F to 250 °F.
B. Definitions
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
discussed removing certain references to
volute in pump definitions and HI
pump class references. 87 FR 21268,
21281. DOE also proposed new
definitions for bowl diameter, SVILs,
BB, VT, RSH, RSHIL, and RSHES
pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21281–21283.
Further, DOE considered updating the
definitions for close-coupled and
mechanically-coupled pumps. 87 FR
21268, 21283–21284.
DOE received one general comment in
response to the definitions proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR. China suggested
that DOE add corresponding schematic
diagrams to textual definitions. (China,
No. 29 at p. 3)
DOE understands that diagrams can
help provide context and notes that its
current test procedure references ANSI/
HI 1.1–1.2 and ANSI/HI 2.1/2.2, which
includes pump schematics. However,
DOE has found that schematics may
result in greater confusion, since
schematics provide a specific example
design but may not apply to other
designs. For instance, a diagram may
suggest scope restrictions (or
expansions) that are not consistent with
the definition language. Therefore, DOE
is not including schematics or diagrams
in addition to its textual definitions.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17945
1. Removing Certain References to
Volute
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR,
pumps generally have one of two
common discharge types, either a volute
or a diffuser. 87 FR 21268, 21281. A
volute is made up of one or two scrollshaped channels, whereas a diffuser has
three or more passages that diffuse the
liquid that is being pumped. Id. The
current definitions for end-suction and
in-line pumps use only the term
‘‘volute’’ when, in practice, either
volutes or diffusers may be used for
these pump categories. For example,
DOE’s current definition for end-suction
pump specifies that the liquid is
discharged through a volute in a plane
perpendicular to the shaft, while the
definition for ESCC pump, which is an
end-suction pump, specifically
references OH7 18 pumps. 10 CFR
431.462. However, Table 14.1.3.7 of HI
14.1–14.2–2019 specifies a diffuser as
the standard casing for OH7 pumps.
Similarly, DOE’s current definition for
IL pump states that the liquid is
discharged through a volute in a plane
perpendicular to the shaft, and
specifically references OH4 and OH5
pumps as examples of end-suction
pumps. Id. In contrast, Table 14.1.3.7 of
HI 14.1–14.2–2019 specifies a diffuser
as the standard casing for OH4 and OH5
pumps. DOE noted in the April 2022
NOPR that HI 1.1–1.2–2014 did not
make these casing distinctions. 87 FR
21268, 21281.
DOE interprets the term ‘‘volute’’ in
its definitions for ‘‘end-suction pump’’
and ‘‘in-line pump’’ to mean the part of
the pump casing through which liquid
is discharged generally, rather than to
reference a specific type of discharge.
To avoid this unintentional
inconsistency between DOE’s
terminology and the terminology used
by the updated industry standard, DOE
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to
amend the definitions of in-line pump
and end-suction pump to remove the
distinction that liquid is discharged
‘‘through a volute in a plane
perpendicular to the shaft’’ [emphasis
added] by specifying instead that liquid
is discharged ‘‘in a plane perpendicular
to the shaft.’’ Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
HI, Grundfos, and China stated they
support the volute clarification. (HI, No.
33 at p. 3; China, No. 29 at p. 4;
Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3)
For the reasons discussed, DOE is
adopting the amended definitions for
18 OH5 and OH7 pumps are defined as closecoupled pumps in ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019. OH4
pumps are defined as rigidly-coupled/short-coupled
pumps in ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17946
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
end-suction and in-line pumps as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
2. HI Pump Class References
The current DOE definitions for ESCC
pump, ESFM pump, IL pump, RSV
pump, and ST pump all include
references to ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 or
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 pump
configurations as examples of pumps
that would meet the given definition. In
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to
remove references to specific pump
configurations as defined in ANSI/HI
1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–
2014 in the definitions for ESCC, ESFM,
IL, RSV, and ST pumps since DOE and
HI terminology are not wholly
consistent. 87 FR 21268, 21281.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
Grundfos stated it agrees with the
proposal to remove the reference to
ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 in DOE’s
definitions for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV,
and ST pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
3) In its comments, HI recommended
replacing references to ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2
and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2 with the updated
ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019, which
superseded ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2 and ANSI/
HI 2.1–2.2. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4) HI further
explained that these references are used
as the industry standard and will
provide clarity to the market. Id.
DOE notes that its definitional
language must be clear and consistent
on its own without the support of
diagrams or schematics, as application
of additional diagrams or schematics
may confuse the intent of a given
definition. To establish self-contained
definitions, DOE is removing the
references to ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 in the ESCC,
ESFM, IL, RSV and ST pump
definitions, as proposed in the April
2022 NOPR. DOE has determined that
the definitions without references to
ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI
2.1–2.2–2014 provide sufficient
specificity to clearly define the various
pump categories.
3. Bowl Diameter
The current DOE definition for ‘‘bowl
diameter’’ references the definition of
‘‘intermediate bowl’’ in ANSI/HI 2.1–
2.2–2014. This mention is the sole
remaining reference to ANSI/HI 2.1–
2.2–2014 in the test procedure, since
DOE is eliminating the HI pump class
references to ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014. In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively
determined that a self-contained
definition for bowl diameter is clearer.
87 FR 21268, 21281. To disassociate the
definition of ‘‘bowl diameter’’ from
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014, DOE proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
in the April 2022 NOPR to define ‘‘bowl
diameter’’ as ‘‘the maximum dimension
of an imaginary straight line passing
through, and in the plane of, the circular
shape of the intermediate bowl of the
bare pump that is perpendicular to the
pump shaft and that intersects the
outermost circular shape of the
intermediate bowl of the bare pump at
both of its ends.’’ Id. With respect to
‘‘intermediate bowl,’’ DOE proposed to
define this term as ‘‘the enclosure
within which the impeller rotates and
which serves as a guide for the flow
from one impeller to the next.’’ Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
both HI and Grundfos encouraged DOE
to also update the definition of
‘‘intermediate bowl’’ to be ‘‘bowl’’ as
defined in ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 3)
Considering comments received, DOE
is adopting a definition for ‘‘bowl’’
rather than ‘‘intermediate bowl.’’ DOE is
defining bowl in 10 CFR 431.462 to
mean a casing in which the impeller
rotates, and that directs flow axially to
the next stage or the discharge column.
This definition is consistent with the
definition for ‘‘bowl’’ in ANSI/HI 14.1–
14.2–2019. In this final rule, DOE is
modifying the definition for bowl
diameter proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to refer to ‘‘bowl’’ instead of
‘‘intermediate bowl’’.
4. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to expand the scope of the test
procedure to include SVIL pumps,
which are identical to IL pumps except
for having a shaft input power less 1 hp.
87 FR 21268, 21282. The Circulator
Pump Working Group recommended
that SVIL pumps be defined as a single
stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor,
rotodynamic pump that: (1) has a shaft
input power less than 1 hp at the best
efficiency point at full impeller
diameter, (2) is distributed in commerce
with a motor that does not have to be
in a horizontal position to function as
designed, and (3) discharges the
pumped liquid through a volute in a
plane perpendicular to the shaft.
(Docket No. EERE–2016–BT–STD–0004,
No. 58 Recommendations #3C at p. 3)
The recommended definition would
distinguish SVIL pumps from DOE’s
current IL pump definition 19 in that
19 An
‘‘in-line (IL) pump’’ means a pump that is
either a twin-head pump or a single-stage, singleaxis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that has a
shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller
diameter, in which liquid is discharged through a
volute in a plane perpendicular to the shaft. Such
pumps do not include pumps that are
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
SVIL pumps have a reduced shaft power
input range 20 and a different maximum
pump power output limitation.21 The
change to shaft input power is the
primary distinction between IL and
SVIL pumps. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE tentatively determined this
distinction would be necessary to
adequately separate the two categories.
87 FR 21268, 21282. The pump power
output is a consequence of the shaft
power limitations. Id. DOE tentatively
determined that SVIL pumps do not
require a 5 hp pump power output
limitation, as their shaft input power is
already capped below 1 hp. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE noted
that another difference is that the IL
definition includes a group of three
parameters to exclude circulator
pumps—namely that they are either
mechanically-coupled or close-coupled,
have a pump power output that is less
than or equal to 5 hp at BEP at full
impeller diameter, and are distributed
in commerce with a horizontal motor.
87 FR 21268, 21282. In contrast, the
recommended SVIL definition is meant
to exclude circulator pumps through
clause (2) (i.e., ‘‘related to distribution
in commerce with a motor that does not
have to be in a horizontal position to
function as designed’’). Id. On
September 9, 2022, DOE published a
test procedure final rule for circulator
pumps (‘‘Circulator Pumps TP Final
Rule’’). 87 FR 57264. In the Circulator
Pumps TP Final Rule, DOE defined a
circulator pump as consisting of a wetrotor circulator pump; dry rotor, twopiece circulator pump; or dry rotor,
three-piece circulator pumps 87 FR
57264, 57269. The Circulator Pumps TP
Final Rule also defined these
subcategories of circulator pumps. Id. In
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
that for the SVIL definition, rather than
including the recommendation in clause
(2), to instead exclude circulator pumps.
87 FR 21268, 21282. For consistency,
DOE also proposed to revise the IL
pump definition to explicitly exclude
circulator pumps instead of including
the clauses meant to implicitly exclude
them. Id.
DOE notes that clause (3) of the SVIL
definition recommended in the April
2022 NOPR refers to a volute. For the
reasons discussed in section III.B.1 of
mechanically-coupled or close-coupled, have a
pump power output that is less than or equal to 5
hp at BEP at full impeller diameter, and are
distributed in commerce with a horizontal motor.
20 IL pumps are constrained to greater than or
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp,
whereas SVIL pumps must be less than 1 hp.
21 IL pumps have a limit of 5 hp at BEP, whereas
SVIL pumps have no hp limitation.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
this document, DOE is excluding this
reference from the SVIL definition.
The recommended SVIL pump
definition also requires that these
pumps be distributed into commerce
with a motor, meaning SVIL pumps
cannot be sold as bare pumps. In the
April 2022 NOPR, based on a literature
search, DOE tentatively determined that
all SVIL pumps are sold with a motor.
87 FR 21268, 21282. However, by
proposing to replace clause (2) with an
exclusion for circulator pumps, this
requirement would be eliminated. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
discussed that, although not addressed
in the recommendation from the
Circulating Pump Working Group, the
defined term ‘‘twin-head pump’’ (10
CFR 431.462) would be applicable to
SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21282.
Specifically, in the January 2016 Final
Rule, DOE adopted a test procedure for
‘‘twin-head pumps’’, where a twin-head
pump is defined as a ‘‘dry rotor, singleaxis flow, rotodynamic pump that
contains two impeller assemblies,
which both share a common casing,
inlet, and discharge, and each of which
(1) Contains an impeller, impeller shaft
(or motor shaft in the case of closecoupled pumps), shaft seal or packing,
driver (if present), and mechanical
equipment (if present); (2) Has a shaft
input power that is greater than or equal
to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp
at best efficiency point (BEP) and full
impeller diameter; (3) Has the same
primary energy source (if sold with a
driver) and the same electrical, physical,
and functional characteristics that affect
energy consumption or energy
efficiency; (4) Is mounted in its own
volute; and (5) Discharges liquid
through its volute and the common
discharge in a plane perpendicular to
the impeller shaft.’’ 81 FR 4086, 4115–
4117, 4147.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to define SVIL pumps based
on the recommended definition from
the Circulator Pump Working Group,
with modifications to include SVILs
that are small vertical twin-head pumps,
to exclude pumps that are circulator
pumps, and to remove the current
reference to a volute. 87 FR 21268,
21282. Specifically, DOE proposed to
define a ‘‘small vertical in-line pump’’
as a small vertical twin-head pump or
a single stage, single-axis flow, dry
rotor, rotodynamic pump that (1) has a
shaft input power less than 1 hp at the
best efficiency point at full impeller
diameter, (2) in which liquid is
discharged in a plane perpendicular to
the shaft; and (3) is not a circulator
pump. Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
Since SVIL pumps are similar to IL
pumps but operate at a lower
horsepower, and also are available in
twin-head configurations, DOE also
proposed to define ‘‘small vertical twinhead pump’’ in the April 2022 NOPR
and to extend the twin-head pump test
procedure adopted in the January 2016
Final Rule to small vertical twin-head
pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21273.
DOE requested comment on its
proposed revision to the IL definition to
explicitly exclude circulator pumps.
Both Grundfos and HI agreed that DOE
should revise the IL definition to
explicitly exclude circulator pumps.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 4) DOE is adopting the definition for
IL pumps as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR.
DOE also requested comment on the
definitions for ‘‘small vertical in-line
pump’’ and ‘‘small vertical twin-head
pump.’’ DOE also requested comment
on the percentage of SVIL pumps, if
any, that are not sold with a motor, and
whether the definition of SVIL pumps
should be limited to those sold with a
motor.
China requested that DOE provide
additional clarity on the number of
motor phases used in SVILs under 0.25
hp. (China, No. 29 at p. 4) China also
commented that the definition for SVILs
contains ‘‘with bearings on both ends of
the rotating assembly’’ while common
IL pumps on the market do not have
bearings at both ends (China, No. 29 at
p. 3).
HI commented that including SVILs
in the pumps test procedure will ensure
consistency between IL and SVIL
pumps and that SVIL pumps should not
be treated differently from IL pumps.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 3, 4).
Regarding China’s comment on motor
phases for SVILs under 0.25 hp, DOE
clarifies that the SVIL definition does
not, nor does any aspect of the DOE test
procedure, limit the number of phases
of an SVIL motor below 0.25 hp. In
response to China’s question about
bearings in the SVIL definition, DOE
notes that the SVIL definition does not
include ‘‘with bearings on both ends of
the rotating assembly’’ and that the text
China referenced is from the proposed
definition of BB pumps in the April
2022 NOPR.
In response to DOE’s proposed
definition for small vertical twin-head
pumps, Grundfos suggested that DOE
revise the term ‘‘twin head pump’’ to
‘‘in-line twin-head pump’’ to minimize
confusion with the small vertical twinhead pump definition. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 3) Additionally, Grundfos stated
that ‘‘Twin Head Pump’’ is not
consistent with the use of ‘‘twin-head’’
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17947
within the IL definition and needs a
hyphen. Id. HI suggested that DOE
clarify if both the volute discharge and
common discharge must meet the
‘‘plane perpendicular to the impeller
shaft’’ requirement in the small vertical
twin-head pump definition. (HI, No. 33
at p. 4)
After consideration, DOE has
determined that the twin-head and
small vertical twin-head pump
definitions are distinct and specific
enough to avoid confusion. In response
to HI’s comment, DOE clarifies that only
the common discharge of a twin-head
and small vertical twin-head pump have
to be in a plane perpendicular to the
impeller shaft.
Regarding the percentage of SVILs
that are sold with a motor, HI stated that
it does not collect data on SVILs sold
without motors and recommends asking
manufacturers for this information
during interviews. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
While Grundfos commented that it sells
a very small number of SVILs without
a motor, it stated that SVILs sold
without a motor should not be
excluded. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the
SVIL definition proposed in the April
2022 NOPR, with the following revision:
DOE has added a hyphen to the small
vertical twin-head pump term to be
consistent with the twin-head pump
term.
5. Between-Bearing Pumps
As discussed in section III.A.3.a of the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to add
between-bearing pumps to the scope of
its test procedure and therefore
proposed a definition for this pump
category. 87 FR 21268, 21282.
ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 defines
between-bearing pump as a rotodynamic
pump with the impeller(s) mounted on
a shaft between bearings on either end.
In addition, all between-bearing pumps
described in ANSI/HI 14.1–14–2–2019
are mechanically-coupled and dry rotor.
Based on a literature review, DOE
tentatively determined in the April 2022
NOPR that the between-bearing pumps
that are most similar to the pumps
currently regulated by DOE have
axially-split casings and 1 or 2 stages. 87
FR 21268, 21282. Accordingly, using
ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 as the basis for
its approach, DOE proposed in the April
2022 NOPR to use the defined terms
‘‘dry rotor pump,’’ ‘‘rotodynamic
pump,’’ and ‘‘mechanically-coupled
pump’’ to define a between-bearing
pump, i.e., ‘‘an axially-split,
mechanically-coupled, one- or twostage, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump with
bearings on both ends of the rotating
assembly that has a shaft input power
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17948
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less
than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter and at the number of
stages required for testing.’’ 87 FR
21268, 218221282–21283.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
Grundfos agreed with DOE’s proposed
definition for BB pumps and stated that
the definition is sufficient to identify
the intended scope. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 4) HI recommended amending the
definition to be consistent with the
definition for BB1 in ANSI/HI 14.1–
14.2–2019.22 (HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
As discussed, DOE is not including
BB pumps within the scope of this test
procedure; therefore, DOE is not
adopting the proposed definition for BB
pumps.
DOE also proposed to define ‘‘axiallysplit pump,’’ a term associated with BB
pumps, in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
21268, 21283. The term ‘‘axially-split’’
refers to a pump casing that can be
separated, for maintenance and
assembly, in a plane parallel to the
impeller shaft. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE proposed to define an ‘‘axiallysplit pump’’ as ‘‘a pump with a casing
that can be separated or split in a plane
that is parallel to and which contains
the axis of the impeller shaft.’’ Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
HI and Grundfos supported DOE’s
proposed definitions for axially-split
pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4; HI,
No. 33 at p. 4)
Again, since DOE is not including BB
pumps within the scope of this test
procedure, DOE is not adopting the
proposed definition for axially-split
pumps.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
6. Vertical Turbine Pump
As discussed in section III.A.3.b, DOE
is adding vertical turbine pumps to the
scope of its test procedure and proposed
a definition for vertical turbine pumps
in the April 2022 NOPR. ANSI/HI 14.2–
14.2–2019 defines vertical turbine
pumps as ‘‘single-casing, nonsubmersible pumps with impellers
mounted in a vertically suspended
shaft, that discharge liquid through the
column.’’ Using this definition as a
basis, DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to define ‘‘vertical turbine pump’’
as a vertically-suspended, single-stage
or multi-stage, dry rotor, rotodynamic
pump (1) That has a shaft input power
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less
than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
22 ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 defines BB1 Pumps as
one and two stage axially split casing pumps that
are generally characterized by the following
attributes: (1) pump and drive have separate shafts;
(2) the pump has two integral bearing housings to
absorb all pump axial and radial pump hydraulic
loads.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
impeller diameter and at the number of
stages required for testing; (2) For which
no external part of such a pump is
designed to be submerged in the
pumped liquid; (3) That has a single
pressure containing boundary (i.e., is
single casing), which may consist of but
is not limited to bowls, columns, and
discharge heads; and (4) That discharges
liquid through the same casing in which
the impeller shaft is contained. 87 FR
21268, 21283.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
both HI and Grundfos recommended
that DOE update the definition for
vertical turbine pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p.
1, 2 and 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
Specifically, HI and Grundfos
mentioned that clause 2 of DOE’s
definition, which states ‘‘no external
part of such a pump is designed to be
submerged in the pumped liquid,’’
would exclude all vertical turbine
pumps because their typical bowl
assembly is submerged. Id. HI also
explained that, within the pumps
industry, vertical turbine pumps are
understood to be VS1 and V3 types and
do not include VS2 23 pumps. Id. HI
therefore recommended that DOE
reference ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 5)
Grundfos suggested that DOE exclude
VS2 pumps and change the term from
‘‘vertical turbine pumps’’ to ‘‘vertical
turbine, bowl assembly’’ to avoid
confusion (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4).
Additionally, Grundfos commented that
DOE should add a definition for ‘‘bowl
assembly’’ and directly reference section
14.1.7.6 of ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2. Id.
Finally, Grundfos recommended that
DOE use the term ‘bowl assembly’ rather
than ‘pump’, since ‘pump’ implies that
losses for column, line shaft discharge
head, etc. would be included. Id.
After further evaluation and
considering the comments received,
DOE has concluded that the definition
for vertical turbine pumps proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR would exclude all
vertical turbine pumps since all or part
of the bowl assembly is designed to be
submerged in the pumped fluid. This
was not DOE’s intent; therefore, DOE is
adopting a revised definition for vertical
turbine pump that excludes only pumps
with the driver submerged in the pump
liquid. This allows the bowl assembly of
vertical turbine pumps to be submerged
in the pumped liquid, but still
differentiates vertical turbine pumps
from submersible turbine pumps. In
23 VS1, VS2, and VS3 pumps are vertically
suspended impeller type pumps that discharge
through a column. VS1 pumps have a diffuser, VS2
pumps use a volute, and VS3 pumps have axial
flow. They are defined further in section 1.3.3.1.2
of ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
response to comments from HI and
Grundfos about referencing ANSI/HI
14.1–14.2–2019, DOE has determined
not to reference ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–
2019 in the definition for vertical
turbine pumps. This determination is
discussed in detail in section III.C.1. of
this document. DOE has determined
that the adopted definitions in this final
rule are sufficiently specific and
detailed to stand on their own without
reference to industry definitions.
7. Radially-Split, Multi-Stage Horizontal
Pumps
As discussed in section III.A.3.c, DOE
is including RSH pumps with both endsuction and in-line flow configurations
in the scope of the DOE test procedure.
RSH pumps are nearly identical to RSV
pumps except for the mounting
orientation and flow configurations. As
discussed in section III.A.3.c, RSH
pumps may have different flow
configurations that are expected to
impact pump efficiency; therefore, in
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
three definitions for RSH pumps based
on the existing DOE definition for RSV
pumps: one for an overarching category
of RSH pumps, which does not
characterize flow; one for in-line RHS
pumps (‘‘RHSIL’’); and one for endsuction RSH pumps (‘‘RSHESS). 10 CFR
431.462; 87 FR 21268, 21283.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
both HI and Grundfos supported DOE’s
proposed definitions for RSH, RSHIL,
and RSHES pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 5; HI, No. 33 at p. 5) However,
Grundfos commented that the RSH
definitions are quite broad and will
likely capture multiple different pump
products under the RSHES definition.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2) Grundfos
requested that DOE clarify which
pumps meet this definition and whether
these pumps should be considered as a
single pump category. Id.
DOE has determined that additional
pump category definitions within the
RSH definitions are not necessary for
the purposes of testing. DOE interprets
that the concerns shared by Grundfos
are based on differences in hydraulic
performance between different RSH
pumps. DOE notes that should it find
notable hydraulic performance
differences between RSH, RSHES, and
RSHIL pumps, DOE would consider
these differences and define separate
equipment classes accordingly for any
future energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the
definitions for RHS, RHSES, and
RHSILs as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
8. Close-Coupled and MechanicallyCoupled Pumps
DOE defines a close-coupled pump as
a pump having a motor shaft that also
acts as the impeller shaft. See 10 CFR
431.462. DOE defines a mechanicallycoupled pump as a pump that has its
own impeller shaft and bearings
separate from the motor shaft. See 10
CFR 431.462. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE discussed how its definitions for
close-coupled and mechanicallycoupled pumps did not account for end
suction pumps that do not have bearings
separate from the motor and do not have
the impellers mounted on the motor
shaft. 87 FR 21268, 21283. In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed revisions to
the definitions for close-coupled and
mechanically-coupled pumps to
eliminate this gap. Id. DOE proposed
that (1) A close-coupled pump means a
pump in which the driver’s bearings
absorb the pump’s axial load; and (2) A
mechanically-coupled pump means a
pump in which bearings external to the
driver absorb the pump’s axial load. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
HI recognized DOE’s effort to clarify the
definitions for ESFM and ESCC pumps
but provided the following
recommendations to further improve
clarity: (1) A close-coupled pump means
a pump in which radial and axial loads
are primarily supported by the driver;
and (2) A mechanically-coupled pump
means a pump in which radial and axial
loads are primarily supported external
to the driver. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5)
Grundfos commented that the
proposed revisions to the ESFM and
ESCC definitions will create additional
burden for manufacturers that must
reclassify products accordingly.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5)
DOE interprets HI’s comment to
indicate that the definitions for closecoupled and mechanically-coupled
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR did
not leave enough flexibility for pumps
where most, but not all, of a pump’s
axial load is supported by either
bearings external to the driver or by the
driver. DOE acknowledges that some
flexibility is important when defining
close-coupled and mechanicallycoupled to avoid excluding any end
suction pumps. However, DOE notes
that the definitions recommended by HI
are vague, specifically the term
‘‘primarily’’ which leaves the suggested
definition open to interpretation. In an
effort to add flexibility to the definitions
while minimizing the need for
interpretation, DOE is adopting the
following definitions for close-coupled
and mechanically-coupled pumps,
where the italicized portions of each
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
definition are revisions to the
definitions proposed in the April 2022
NOPR. A close-coupled pump means a
pump in which the driver’s bearings are
designed to absorb the pump’s axial
load. A mechanically-coupled pump
means a pump in which bearings
external to the driver are designed to
absorb the pump’s axial load.
In response to the comment from
Grundfos, DOE notes the change in
definition is intended to improve clarity
rather than substantively shift the
bounds of the ESCC or ESFM pump
categories. DOE has determined, based
on its review of manufacturer literature
and the consensus of industry in the
form of HI’s comments, that the
revisions to close-coupled and
mechanically-coupled pumps do not
change the classification of currently
regulated end suction pumps.
C. Updates to Industry Standards
The current DOE test procedure for
pumps incorporates the following
industry test standards: HI 40.6–2014,
ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014, and ANSI/HI
2.1–2.2–2014. 10 CFR 431.463. The
following sections describe updates to
these industry standards and discuss the
industry standards DOE is incorporating
by reference in the final rule and the
relevant provisions of those industry
standards that DOE is referencing.
1. ANSI/HI 40.6
The current DOE test procedure for
pumps incorporates HI 40.6–2014 for
use in appendix A. The most recent
version of HI 40.6 was published in
2021 (‘‘HI 40.6–2021’’). HI 40.6–2021
includes the following updates to HI
40.6–2014 (relevant sections of HI 40.6–
2021 are included in parentheses after a
summary of the modification):
(1) Clarified that the industy testing
standard covers efficiency testing of
rotodynamic pumps that are subject to DOE’s
energy conservation standards. (Section
40.6.1 ‘‘Scope’’).
(2) Updated the calculation of bare pump
efficiency to match the current DOE test
procedure requirements for plotting test data
to determine the best efficiency point
(‘‘BEP’’) rate of flow. (Section 40.6.6.3
‘‘Performance curve’’).
(3) Updated the description and
requirements of the pressure tap
configuration for measurement sections at
inlet and outlet of the pump. (Section A.3.1.3
‘‘Pressure taps’’).
(4) Added an informative appendix for
determining, applying, and calculating
measurement instrument uncertainty.
(Appendix H ‘‘Determination, application,
and calculation of instrument (systematic)
uncertainty (informative)’’).
(5) References ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2
‘‘Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and
Definitions’’ (‘‘ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2’’) which
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17949
supersedes ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/
HI 2.1–2.2–2014. (Section 40.6.4.1
‘‘Vertically suspended pumps’’; Section
40.6.4.3 ‘‘All other pump types’’).
(6) Includes a new appendix (Appendix E)
for the testing of circulator pumps.
(Appendix E ‘‘Testing Circulator Pumps’’).
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that the
provisions of HI 40.6–2021 that
correspond to the provisions in HI 40.6–
2014 are substantively the same and
adopting such provisions would not
change the current test procedure or
measured PEI values. 87 FR 21268,
21285. Therefore, in the April 2022
NOPR DOE proposed to incorporate by
reference HI 40.6–2021 in place of HI
40.6–2014, in order to reference the
most current industry test procedure. Id.
DOE received no comments on its
proposal to incorporate HI 40.6–2021 by
reference for use in appendix A of the
DOE test procedure. Therefore, in this
final rule DOE is incorporating HI 40.6–
2021 by reference as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR.
While DOE proposed to incorporate
by reference HI 40.6–2021 as the basis
for its proposed test procedure, DOE
tentatively determined in the April 2022
NOPR that certain sections of the
industry test standard are not applicable
to the DOE test procedure. 87 FR 21268,
21285. Specifically:
(1) Section 40.6.1, Scope, provides the
scope specific to the test methods outlined in
HI 40.6–2021;
(2) Section 40.6.5.3 provides provisions
regarding the generation of a test report;
(3) Appendix ‘‘B’’ provides informative
guidance on test report formatting;
(4) Appendix ‘‘E’’ provides normative test
procedures for circulator pumps; and
(5) Appendix ‘‘G’’ compares HI 40.6–2021
and DOE’s nomenclature. Id.
None of these sections are required for
testing and rating pumps in accordance
with the test procedure that DOE
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. As
such, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to not adopt Section 40.6.1,
Section 40.6.5.3, appendix B, appendix
E, and appendix G in the April 2022
NOPR. Id.
DOE received no comments on the
proposal to exclude the specified
sections of HI 40.6–2021 from the DOE
test procedure. Therefore, in this final
rule, DOE is adopting the exclusions as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
Additionally, as discussed in the
April 2022 NOPR, certain provisions of
HI 40.6–2021 are consistent with the
provisions of the current DOE test
procedure in appendix A. 87 FR 21268,
21285. DOE proposed to remove these
provisions in appendix A and instead
reference the appropriate sections of HI
40.6–2021, specifically:
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17950
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(1) Section I.D.1 of appendix A, which
addresses damping devices, is amended to
reference the corresponding provisions in HI
40.6.3.2.2;
(2) Section I.D.2 of appendix A, which
addresses stabilization, is amended to
reference the corresponding provisions in HI
40.6.5.5.1;
(3) Section I.D.3 of appendix A, which
addresses calculations and rounding, is
amended to reference the corresponding
provisions in HI 40.6.6.1.1;
(4) Sections III.D.1, IV.D.1, V.D.1, VI.D.1,
and VII.D.1 of appendix A, which outline
testing the BEP of different pump
configurations, are amended to reference the
corresponding provisions in HI 40.6.5.5.1. Id.
DOE received no comments on its
proposal to remove provisions of
appendix A and instead reference the
equivalent provisions in HI 40.6–2021
and is therefore adopting the revisions
as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI
2.1–2.2–2014
Subpart Y to part 431 currently
incorporates by reference ANSI/HI 1.1–
1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014.
DOE references ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014
and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 for defining
certain terms in 10 CFR 431.462. In
2019, ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/
HI 2.1–2.2–2014 were updated and
combined into ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–
2019, ‘‘American National Standard for
Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature
and Definitions’’ (‘‘ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–
2019’’). The notable additions to ANSI/
HI 14.1–14.2 that were absent in ANSI/
HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–
2014 are outlined below:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
(1) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 includes
additional figures and tables to represent
information included in ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–
2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014;
(2) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 adds new
pump definitions and pump classifications;
(3) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 includes
configuration definitions for vertical in-line,
vertical end-suction, vertical self-priming,
seal-less, magnetic drive, canned motor, and
multi-stage pumps;
(4) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 adds new
definitions for discharge casing, volute,
concentric casing, modified concentric
casing, vaned diffuser/collector, bowl, and
stage casing; and 24
(5) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 includes a
new ‘‘preferred operating region’’ section to
define a guideline for recommended
operating flow rates.
As stated previously, the current DOE
test procedure incorporates pump
designations from ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–
2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 as
examples for the definitions of ESCC,
ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps under
the DOE test procedure. 10 CFR
24 A
volute may also be referred to as a ‘‘housing’’
or ‘‘casing.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
431.462. DOE notes that, in general, the
references to ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 are in the context
of providing non-limiting examples.
DOE is concerned that continued
inclusion of HI pump designations as
examples of specific pump categories
may cause confusion in the market or be
misunderstood to limit the scope of the
relevant definitions. To minimize
potential misapplication of its
definitions, DOE is removing the
references to ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 as examples of
certain pump category definitions, as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. 87
FR 21268, 21286. Additional detail on
the adopted changes to the definitions is
discussed in section III.B.2 of this
document.
Additionally, DOE’s current test
procedure definition of ‘‘bowl diameter’’
relies on the ‘‘intermediate bowl’’
definition in ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014. As
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
is modifying its definition for ‘‘bowl
diameter’’ and adding a DOE definition
for ‘‘bowl’’ to remove the current
reference to ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014. Id.
These changes will create a more selfcontained definition and are discussed
in section III.B.3 of this document.
DOE is incorporating ANSI/HI 14.1–
14.2–2019 by reference for use in
appendix A since it is referenced in HI
40.6–2019. However, DOE does not
directly reference ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–
2019 in appendix A.
D. Metric
The current energy efficiency
standards for pumps are based on the
PEI metric. 10 CFR 431.465. The PEI
metric is a ratio of the pump energy
rating (‘‘PER’’) of the tested pump to the
PER of a minimally compliant pump
(‘‘PERSTD’’). See section II of appendix
A. The current test procedure defines
the PEICL metric as the pump energy
index for a constant load, as applicable
to pumps rated as bare pumps or sold
with motors; and the PEIVL metric, the
pump energy index for a variable load,
as applicable to pumps sold with motors
and continuous controls or
noncontinuous controls. Appendix A,
section II.A. A ‘‘continuous control’’ is
a control that adjusts the speed of the
pump driver continuously over the
driver’s operating speed range in
response to incremental changes in the
required pump flow, head, or power
output. 10 CFR 431.462. A ‘‘noncontinuous control’’ is a control that
adjusts the speed of a driver to one of
a discrete number of non-continuous
pre-set operating speeds and does not
respond to incremental reductions in
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the required pump flow, head, or power
output. Id.
PERCL is calculated as the average of
driver power input at 75 percent, 100
percent, and 110 percent of flow at the
BEP, where the flows are achieved by
varying the operating head to follow the
pump performance curve. See appendix
A, section II.A.1 and subsequently
referenced sections. PERVL is calculated
as the average of driver power input at
25 percent, 50 percent, 75 percent, and
100 percent of flow at BEP, where the
flows are achieved by speed reduction
to follow a specified system curve. See
appendix A, section II.A.2 and
subsequently referenced sections. BEP is
defined as the pump hydraulic power
operating point (consisting of both flow
and head conditions) that results in the
maximum efficiency. 10 CFR 431.462.
This section discusses the regulatory
metric for SVIL pumps and additional
clean water pumps that DOE is
incorporating into its test procedure.
In the April 2022 NOPR, based on
manufacturer feedback to this
rulemaking and the current circulator
pumps rulemaking,25 DOE tentatively
determined that use of PERCL and PERVL
and indexing the results against PERSTD
would be a reasonable and consistent
way to evaluate SVIL performance. 87
FR 21268, 21286. This determination
was based largely on the similarity of
SVILs to in-line pumps, which are
evaluated using the PERCL and PERVL
metrics. Id. As such, DOE proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR that the rating
metric for SVIL pumps would be PEICL
for constant load pumps and PEIVL for
variable load pumps, equivalent to the
metric already in use for currently
covered commercial and industrial
pumps. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR DOE
tentatively determined that, for BB, VT,
and RSH pumps, the test procedure will
measure energy efficiency during a
representative average use cycle and not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. 87
FR 21268, 21286. This determination
was based on the similarities between
the pump categories that are addressed
in the current test procedure and those
that DOE proposed to include in the
scope of the test procedure. Id. DOE
tentatively determined that PEICL and
PEIVL are appropriate metrics for BB,
VT, and RSH pumps. Id. Using PEICL
and PEIVL for these additional pump
categories ensures a consistent rating
approach in the market. Id. In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that the
PEICL and PEIVL metric would be used
25 A link to the circulator pumps docket web page
can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE2016-BT-STD-0004.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
for rating the performance of BB, VT,
and RSH pumps. Id.
For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs, for SVIL, VT, and
RSH pumps, DOE is adopting PEICL for
constant load pumps and PEIVL for
variable load pumps, equivalent to the
metric already in use for currently
covered commercial and industrial
pumps.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
China suggested that DOE revise PERstd
on the basis of a scientific assessment of
the new pumps being added to the test
procedure scope. (China, No. 29 at p. 3)
DOE notes that this test procedure final
rule does contain amendments that may
adjust PERstd for both current and
expanded scope pumps. However, the
overall methodology of determining
PERstd does not differ by pump category;
PERstd is specific to the flow and
specific speed of a given pump model
and includes a C-value that sets the
energy conservation standard and is
specific to a given pump category.
Adopting a C-value for the expanded
scope pumps would be considered in an
energy conservation standard
rulemaking rather than in this test
procedure rulemaking.
E. Amendments to Test Method
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
DOE is incorporating HI 40.6–2021
into appendix A of subpart Y of 10 CFR
part 431. HI 40.6–2021 specifies
calculating pump power input,26 driver
power input (for testing-based
methods),27 pump power output,28
pump efficiency,29 bowl efficiency,30
overall efficiency,31 and other relevant
values at the specified load points
necessary to determine PEICL and PEIVL.
HI 40.6–2021 also contains provisions
for test methodology, standard rating
26 The term ‘‘pump power input’’ in HI 40.6–2021
is defined as ‘‘the power transmitted to the pump
by its driver’’ and is synonymous with the term
‘‘pump shaft input power,’’ as used in this
document.
27 The term ‘‘driver power input’’ in HI 40.6–2014
is defined as ‘‘the power absorbed by the pump
driver’’ and is synonymous with the term ‘‘pump
input power to the driver,’’ as used in this
document.
28 The term ‘‘pump power output’’ in HI–40.6–
2021 is defined as ‘‘the mechanical power
transferred to the liquid as it passes through the
pump, also known as pump hydraulic power.’’ It is
used synonymously with ‘‘pump hydraulic power’’
in this document.
29 The term ‘‘pump efficiency’’ is defined in HI
40.6–2014 as a ratio of pump power output to pump
power input.
30 The term ‘‘bowl efficiency’’ is defined in HI
40.6–2014 as a ratio of pump power output to bowl
assembly power input and is applicable only to
VTS and RSV pumps.
31 The term ‘‘overall efficiency’’ is defined in HI
40.6–2014 as a ratio of pump power output to driver
power input and describes the combined efficiency
of a pump and driver.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
conditions, equipment specifications,
uncertainty calculations, and tolerances.
Sections II through VII of appendix A
specify methods for determining PEICL
and PEIVL for pumps based on whether
they are distributed into commerce with
a motor and/or with controls. These
sections are summarized as follows:
• Section II: Calculation of PEICL or
PEIVL for all pumps based on the pump
energy rating for a minimally compliant
reference pump (PERCL or PERVL,
respectively);
• Section III: Test procedure for bare
pumps;
• Section IV: Testing-based approach
for pumps sold with motors;
• Section V: Calculation-based
approach for pumps sold with motors;
• Section VI: Testing-based approach
for pumps sold with motors and
controls; and
• Section VII: Calculation-based
approach for pumps sold with motors
and controls.
See appendix A, sections I.A.2
through I.A.6.
The following sections summarize the
amendments to the current test
procedure that DOE proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR, address stakeholder
comments on these proposals, and
finalize provisions for the amended test
procedure.
1. Nominal Speed
The scope of the current test
procedure is limited to pumps designed
to operate with either a 2- or 4-pole
induction motor or a non-induction
motor with a speed of rotation operating
range between 2,880 and 4,320 rpm
and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). Section I.C.1 of
appendix A specifies the selection of
nominal speed of rotation of either
1,800 or 3,600 rpm depending on the
number of poles of the motor or the
operating range of non-induction
motors.
As discussed in section III.A.4.b, DOE
is including pumps that operate at
greater than or equal to 960 rpm and
less than 1,440 rpm or are designed to
operate with 6-pole motors in the test
procedure. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE proposed that these pumps would
be tested with a nominal speed of 1,200
rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21287. DOE also
proposed to update the calculation and
rounding sections of the test procedure
to address this additional nominal
speed. Id.
China commented that the DOE test
procedure for 1,200 rpm pumps may
result in cavitation and suggested that
DOE instead provide a speed reduction
test using pump affinity rules. (China,
No. 29 at p. 3)
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17951
DOE notes that the test procedure for
1,200 rpm pumps would use a nominal
test speed of 1,200 rpm. DOE has
determined that this would be most
representative of field operation for
these pumps. If cavitation occurs at
1,200 rpm for a given pump under test,
DOE considers that this is representative
of field performance and is therefore a
valid test. No other stakeholders
identified cavitation as an issue for
1,200 rpm pumps.
HI stated it expects testing 6-pole
pumps will significantly increase test
burden and test cost; however, HI
expects minimal energy savings relative
to manufacturer impact since the
volume of equipment impacted is small.
(HI, No. 33 at p.3). Specifically, HI
stated that most of these pumps are
already regulated as 4-pole products. Id.
In response to HI’s comments, DOE
notes that increased burden associated
with test procedure modifications is
estimated and discussed in section III.L
of this document. DOE will evaluate
energy savings during its energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the
amendments to the test procedure as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. Testing of Multi-Stage Pumps
The current DOE test procedure
specifies that RSV pumps shall be tested
with three stages and that ST pumps
shall be tested with nine stages. If the
unit under test is only available with
fewer than the required number of
stages, the pump is tested with the
maximum number of stages with which
the unit is distributed in commerce in
the United States. If the unit under test
is only available with greater than the
number of required stages, the pump is
tested with the lowest number of stages
with which the unit is distributed in
commerce in the United States. If the
unit under test is available with both
fewer and greater than the required
number of stages, but not the required
number of stages, the pump is tested
with the number of stages closest to the
required number of stages. If both the
next lower and next higher number of
stages are equivalently close to the
required number of stages, the pump is
tested with the next higher number of
stages. See appendix A, section I.C.2.
RSH and VT pumps also may be sold
with a varying number of stages, in
which the same pump may have options
for multiple different stages for multiple
applications. To reduce testing burden
and mirror the practice established for
RSV pumps, DOE proposed in the April
2022 NOPR that RSH pumps be tested
with three stages. 87 FR 21268, 21287.
To reduce testing burden and mirror the
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17952
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
practice established for ST pumps, DOE
proposed testing VT pumps with nine
stages. Id. If the pump under test is not
distributed in commerce with the
number of stages prescribed for testing,
DOE proposed that the existing
instructions for selecting the correct
number of stages during testing would
be followed. Id.
As defined in section III.B.5, BB
pumps can have either one or two
stages. For BB basic models that are
distributed into commerce with both
one and two stages, DOE proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR to test BB pumps
at two stages. 87 FR 21268, 21287. DOE
discussed that this approach is
consistent with the provisions in the
current test procedure that require
multi-stage pumps be tested with more
than one stage. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
HI and Grundfos supported the
proposed number of stages for testing
RSH, VT, and BB pumps. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 5; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) HI
additionally commented that a one-stage
BB pump and a two-stage BB pump will
always be different basic models. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 5) China requested that DOE
provide additional description for when
BB pumps would be tested using onestage versus two-stage. (China, No. 29 at
p. 4)
As DOE is not including BB pumps
within the scope of this test procedure
DOE is not adopting the multi-stage
testing provisions for BB pumps
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs, DOE is adopting
the number of stages for testing RSH and
VT pumps test procedure as proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR.
3. Load Profile
The current test procedure requires
that the constant load pump energy
rating be determined using 75, 100 and
110 percent of BEP flow with each value
multiplied by 0.3333 and the results
summed to determine PERCL. Appendix
A, sections III.E, IV.E, V.E. Similarly, for
variable load pumps, energy ratings are
determined at 25, 50, 75, and 100
percent of BEP flow with each point
weighted by 0.25 and summed to obtain
a value for PERVL. Appendix A, sections
VI.E, VII.E.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
discussed the current load profiles in
response to comments received from
stakeholders on the April 2021 RFI. 87
FR 21268, 21288. Specifically, DOE
agreed with stakeholders that load
profiles vary depending on the pump
installation environment and
application; however, DOE stated that
the existing load profiles provide a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
consistent method for comparing the
performance of different pumps. Id.
DOE did not propose to modify the
current load profiles in the April 2022
NOPR.
NEEA recommended that DOE
consider test procedures and metrics
that better account for motor and control
performance at various load points in
the future. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) The
CA IOUs stated that they are not aware
of any reports that provide BB pumpspecific operating hour ranges but
suggested that DOE review industrial
cooling, boiler feedwater, and municipal
water supply application reports. (CA
IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3)
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE is not revising the current load
profiles in this final rule notice.
Additionally, SVIL, VT, and RSH
pumps will use the same load profiles
as other pumps previously covered in
the scope of this rulemaking and
described in the preceding paragraphs.
DOE will continue to evaluate the
impact of load profile on PEI.
4. Pumps With BEP at Run-Out
To determine a pump’s BEP, the DOE
test procedure references testing
provisions included in HI 40.6–2014
(excluding sections 40.6.5.3, section A.7
and appendix B) at the following seven
flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and
120 percent of the expected BEP flow
rate of the pump at the nominal speed
of rotation. Appendix A, section III.D.1.
All pumps have a maximum flow rate
which is termed ‘‘run-out.’’ For pumps
where the BEP is expected to be within
20 percent of the maximum flow rate of
the pump (BEP at run-out), section I.D.4
of appendix A provides alternative flow
points, with the maximum flow point
equal to 100 percent of the expected
maximum flow rate so that the pump
may safely operate. As discussed in
section III.C.1, Sections 40.6.5.5.1 and
40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021 now include
provisions related to pumps with BEP at
run-out. Section 40.6.5.5.1 provides
alternate test points based on the
expected BEP rate of flow for pumps
with a maximum allowable flow rate as
specified by the manufacturer that is
less than 120 percent of the BEP flow
rate. Section 40.6.6.3 also provides
alternate tested load points for the
driver input power as a percentage of
BEP flow rate for pumps that cannot be
safely tested to flows greater than 120
percent of BEP. However, these
provisions are based on flow points
with respect to expected BEP flow rate
rather than expected maximum flow
rate.
In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE
responded to a comment from HI that in
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
order to determine the location of BEP,
testing must occur at rates of flow
greater than 100 percent of expected
BEP flow. 81 FR 4086, 4117. DOE stated
that its proposal to use flow points only
up to 100 percent was with respect to
the expected maximum allowable flow
rate rather than with respect to expected
BEP. Id. DOE notes that the existing
regulatory text contains an omission in
which section I.D.4(1) of appendix A
only refers to ‘‘the expected,’’ while
section I.D.4(2) refers to ‘‘the expected
maximum flow rate of the pump.’’ In the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to
include ‘‘expected maximum flow rate
of the pump’’ in both section I.D.4(1)
and I.D.4(2) of appendix A and would
not reference sections 40.6.5.5.1 or
40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021. 87 FR 21268,
21288. DOE requested comment on
whether the alternate flow points for
pumps with BEP at run-out should be
determined with respect to expected
maximum flow rate or expected BEP
flow rate. Id.
In response, HI recommended that
DOE modify the test procedure to
require testing at 105 percent of BEP as
a minimum criterion for pumps that
cannot be tested to 120 percent of BEP.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 5) HI suggested 105
percent of BEP because lower specific
speed pumps can artificially benefit by
truncating the actual BEP flow. Id.
Grundfos commented that using the
maximum flow rate provides a better
curve for finding BEP and ensures that
curve shape after BEP is properly
captured (where possible). (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 5) Grundfos additionally
stated that using maximum expected
flow can require a second test in some
cases, with small additional burden, if
BEP is found to be plus or minus 5
percent of the tested points but noted
that this burden would be small given
the limited systems reporting using BEP
at run-out provisions. Id.
DOE notes that by relying on
maximum expected flow rather than
expected BEP flow rate, it is likely that
most pumps would test at a minimum
of 105 percent of BEP, as in most cases,
maximum expected flow would not be
less than 5% away from BEP. This
addresses HI’s suggestion to have a
minimum point at 105 percent of BEP,
while also making sure that all pumps
in this category can be tested. This is
also consistent with Grundfos’ comment
that maximum flow provides a better
curve shape, especially after BEP. For
these reasons, DOE is adopting BEP at
run-out provisions as proposed.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
discussed that the current regulatory
text would benefit from additional
detail as to how the revised loading
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
points should be applied in the
determination of PERSTD. 87 FR 21268,
21288. DOE proposed to specify that the
revised loading points would only be
used in application of the ai coefficient
values when determining pump power
input, and not when determining
specific speed (‘‘Ns’’) or the minimallycompliant pump efficiency
(‘‘hpump,STD’’), which should always be
based on 100 percent of BEP flow for
standardization purposes. Id. DOE did
not receive any comments regarding
how the revised loading points should
be applied in the determination of
PERSTD. Therefore, DOE is including the
language as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR.
As part of the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
also identified that the current
provisions for pumps with BEP at runout do not address how to perform
motor sizing for bare pumps, which is
based on the horsepower equivalent to,
or the next highest horsepower greater
than, the pump power input to the bare
pump at 120 percent of the BEP flow
rate of the tested pump. 87 FR 21268,
21288–21289. DOE proposed that for
pumps with BEP at run-out, motor
sizing would be based on 100 percent of
the BEP flow rate of the tested pump, as
there are no flow rates available higher
than that level. Id. However, DOE
acknowledged in the April 2022 NOPR
that this proposed change could result
in inequitable motor sizing compared to
pumps not subject to these provisions.
Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
Grundfos agreed with the use of
maximum flow rate to ensure BEP can
be determined for motor sizing for bare
pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 6)
In this final rule, DOE is including the
motor sizing language for pumps with
BEP at run-out, as proposed in the April
2022 NOPR.
5. Calibration of Measurement
Equipment
The current DOE test procedure
references HI 40.6–2014 Appendix D,
which specifies the frequency at which
measurement equipment should be
calibrated. Table D.1 of HI 40.6–2014
states that manufacturer’s
recommendations on calibration
intervals should be followed if they
differ from those in Table D.1. However,
DOE notes that its test procedure does
not explicitly reference Table D.1 of HI
40.6–2021.
In the dedicated-purpose pool pump
test procedures included in appendices
B and C to subpart Y of 10 CFR part 431
(‘‘appendix B’’, ‘‘appendix C’’), DOE has
included the calibration requirements
contained in Appendix D of ANSI/HI
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
40.6–2014, with modification allowing
for calibration periods up to 3 times
longer than those specified in Table D.1
of ANSI/HI 40.6–2014 if justified by
historical calibration data. See appendix
B, section I.B.2 and appendix C, section
I.B.2.
Similar to the approach that DOE uses
in appendix B and appendix C, DOE
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to
specifically reference the calibration
requirements in Appendix D of HI 40.6–
2021 in section I.B of appendix A to
improve the overall clarity of its test
procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21289.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
Grundfos agreed that including the
reference to HI 40.6, Appendix D
provides consistency and clarity
regarding the required calibration
requirements for testing. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 11).
For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs and the
stakeholder feedback received, DOE is
adopting Table D.1 of ANSI/HI 40.6–
2021 as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR.
6. Calculations and Rounding
The DOE test procedure includes
provisions for calculations and
rounding in section I.D.3 of appendix A.
Generally, all measured data must be
normalized such that it represents
performance at nominal speed of
rotation in accordance with HI 40.6–
2014, and all calculations must be
carried out using raw measured values
without rounding. See appendix A,
section I.D.3. PER is rounded to three
significant digits and PEI is rounded to
the hundredths place. Id. Explicit
rounding directions are not provided for
other parameters.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE did not
propose any changes to its current
rounding requirements, except for
updates to reference the appropriate
section of HI 40.6–2021, as discussed in
section III.C.1 of this document. 87 FR
21268, 21289.
DOE did not receive comments on
this proposal. For the reasons discussed
in the preceding paragraphs and in the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE is adopting the
updated references as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR.
F. Calculation-Based and Testing-Based
Options According to Pump
Configuration (Table 1 of Appendix A)
The DOE test procedure for pumps
includes calculation-based and testingbased options that apply based on pump
configuration (including style of motor
and control) as distributed in commerce.
See appendix A, Table 1. The
calculation-based options rely on a bare
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17953
pump test, whereas the testing-based
options rely on a ‘‘wire-to-water’’ test.
The calculation-based options may
reduce test burden by allowing a
manufacturer to test a sample of bare
pumps and use that data to rate multiple
pump configurations using calculationbased methods. On the other hand,
wire-to-water testing may more
accurately represent pump, motor, and
control performance.
1. Hybrid Mapping Approach
In response to the April 2021 RFI,
NEEA recommended that DOE consider
a hybrid approach to testing and
calculation, similar to the test method
included in Appendix H of ANSI/
AMCA Standard 214–21, ‘‘Test
Procedure for Calculating Fan Energy
Index (FEI) for Commercial and
Industrial Fans and Blowers’’ (’’AMCA
214’’), which stipulates a one-time test
of the motor at multiple load points,
which can be used to determine the
input power at the appropriate pump
test procedure load points and then
used to calculate a rating. With this
method, each motor need only be tested
once, and the results used for multiple
pump configurations. (NEEA, No. 21 at
p. 10)
Similarly, in response to the April
2021 RFI, with respect to pumps sold
with inverter-only motors, the CA IOUs
cautioned against the use of a losses
table for permanent magnet inverteronly motors with a non-integrated
controller sold with a choice of
controller due to variance in
performance between drive units (as
opposed to induction motors, which are
relatively uninfluenced by choice of
drive unit) and instead recommended
this subset use a hybrid power drive
system mapping procedure, which they
expected would reduce burden. (CA
IOUs, No. 19 at pp. 8–9)
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
acknowledged that permanent magnet
inverter-only motors sold without a
controller may perform differently based
on the inverter with which it is paired
and recognized that a hybrid mapping
approach may be beneficial. 87 FR
21268, 21290, 21299. However, DOE
stated that it did not expect that the use
of a hybrid mapping approach would
provide the burden reduction intended
by the use of the calculation method. 87
FR 21268, 21299. While the hybrid
mapping approach would be less
burdensome than multiple wire-to-water
tests, it would likely be significantly
more burdensome than a calculationbased approach based on a bare pump
test, as it would require physical tests of
all motors with which the bare pump
would be paired. Id. Furthermore, DOE
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17954
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
tentatively concluded that the
calculation-based approach is sufficient
to generate appropriately representative
values for this equipment—and with the
option to allow for a testing-based
approach, or an AEDM as discussed in
section III.I.2, a manufacturer would be
free to refine accuracy of the values for
specific equipment. Id.
DOE did not propose a hybrid
approach in the April 2022 NOPR but
requested comment on whether
manufacturers would use a hybrid
mapping approach, and if so, whether
manufacturers would conduct the motor
tests or request the tests from their
suppliers. 87 FR 21268, 21290. In
addition, DOE requested comment on
what additional provisions would need
to be added to Appendix H of AMCA
214 to make it applicable to pumps,
such as speed and load corresponding to
pump rating points. Id. Finally, DOE
requested comment on the merits of
using a hybrid mapping approach
specific to inverter-only motors and
whether it would reduce or increase
manufacturer burden compared to the
current proposals. 87 FR 21268, 21299.
HI stated that hybrid mapping is not
a current practice, so including this
would add complexity and confusion,
without an understood benefit. (HI, No.
33 at p. 6, 7) HI stated that the hybrid
approach would be significantly more
burdensome than a calculation-based
approach based on a bare pump test,
and that the calculation approach based
on coefficients and bare pump test is
sufficient to generate appropriately
representative values or the equipment.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 7). HI added that in
many cases hybrid mapping data would
not be available. For these reasons HI is
not in favor of a hybrid mapping
approach for inverter-only motors. Id.
Grundfos stated that compared to the
current proposals of calculated method
and AEDM, it did not believe a hybrid
mapping approach would reduce
burden. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7)
Grundfos commented that a hybrid
mapping approach is not currently
necessary since DOE has proposed a
method for calculating PEIs for pumps
sold with inverter-only motors. Id. at 6.
However, Grundfos also stated they
believe a hybrid mapping approach
could provide more representative PEIs
when compared to calculation-based
approaches, but that more effort would
be necessary to define a suitable motor
mapping procedure to ensure it is
applicable to pumping. Id.
NEEA recommended that in future
proceedings DOE consider an optional
hybrid approach to testing pumps sold
with inverter-only synchronous motors
to show the improvement in Pump
Energy Index (PEI) from IE5 motors.
(NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2)
DOE agrees with stakeholders that it
is premature to develop a hybrid
mapping approach in this rulemaking,
but notes that DOE may consider the
issue in future rulemakings.
2. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold
With Induction Motors and Controls
Based on its review of available
coefficients and part-load loss data, DOE
tentatively determined in the April 2022
NOPR that without further data
indicating that its current coefficients
overstate motor drive system losses for
pumps, it would retain its current loss
model for motors less than 50 hp. 87 FR
21268, 21296. DOE noted that its
current coefficients correspond to about
30 percent added harmonic losses and
a 3 percent variable frequency drive
(‘‘VFD’’) efficiency penalty. Id. DOE
stated that it would consider revising its
coefficients below 50 hp in accordance
with the method suggested by HI,32 or
to harmonize with fans or with
international standards, given
appropriate data specific to pumps. Id.
To ensure that the calculation method
does not overrate pumps, while
balancing stakeholders’ requests for
representativeness, DOE proposed to
allow use of an AEDM, as discussed in
section III.I.2 of this document. Id. DOE
requested (1) data indicating whether
AHRI 1210-certified data is applicable
to pumps as well as any other
applicable part-load loss data; (2) data
indicating whether 15 percent and 25
percent incremental losses, which are
specified as part of IE3 ratings that are
not commonly used in the U.S., are
applicable to the U.S. and do not
overstate performance, and if not, what
incremental losses would be appropriate
to apply, and (3) data indicating an
appropriate VFD efficiency penalty by
hp. Id.
HI stated that related to item 2, the 15
percent and 25 percent incremental
losses are appropriate and should be
representative of motors commonly
used in the U.S. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI
understood that NEMA supported these
values and is adopting them into a
future American National Standard. Id.
In its comment to the April 2021 RFI,
HI stated that losses are especially
overstated in the 50 hp to 100 hp range.
(HI, No. 22 at p.3) In the April 2022
NOPR, DOE discussed its findings that
its existing coefficients show a decrease
in full-load efficiency at 75 hp, which
would not be expected. 87 FR 21268,
21296. In addition, DOE noted that the
AHRI 1210-certified data is limited to a
maximum of 75 hp and does not exist
at higher hp. Id. Furthermore, DOE
stated that its current coefficients in the
50 hp to 100 hp range correspond to
about 60 percent added harmonic losses
and a 3 percent VFD penalty, and, based
on previous discussion of typical losses,
DOE tentatively determined that these
losses are too high. Id.
In light of the fact that DOE’s
coefficients in the 50 hp to 100 hp
represent harmonic losses that are too
high, DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to update its coefficients for
motors rated at 50 hp and above. 87 FR
21268, 21296. To adjust its coefficients
for motors 50 hp and above, DOE started
with the current DOE default losses for
the motor-only at full-load and added 15
to 25 percent losses, as applicable, as
well as a VFD efficiency penalty of 3
percent. Id. DOE then adjusted the
current DOE default losses for the motor
and control at 100 percent to match the
result of adding the incremental
harmonic losses and VFD penalty, and
applied the same adjustment factor to
all load points. Id. Table III.1
summarizes DOE’s proposal for the
induction motor and control part-load
loss coefficients. Id. DOE requested
comment on its proposed part-load loss
factors for induction motors and
controls greater than 50 hp. Id.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
TABLE III.1—PROPOSED INDUCTION MOTOR AND CONTROL PART LOAD LOSS FACTOR EQUATION COEFFICIENTS
Coefficients for induction motor and control part
load loss factor
(zi)
Motor horsepower
(hp)
a
≤5 .................................................................................................................................................
32 HI suggested new part load loss coefficients
based on the differences between incremental losses
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
b
¥0.4658
predicted by IEC 60034–31 and the current DOE
part load loss coefficients. (HI, No. 22 at p. 3)
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
c
1.4965
0.5303
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
17955
TABLE III.1—PROPOSED INDUCTION MOTOR AND CONTROL PART LOAD LOSS FACTOR EQUATION COEFFICIENTS—
Continued
Coefficients for induction motor and control part
load loss factor
(zi)
Motor horsepower
(hp)
a
>5 and ≤20 ...................................................................................................................................
>20 and ≤50 .................................................................................................................................
>50 and ≤100 ...............................................................................................................................
>100 .............................................................................................................................................
Grundfos agreed that the updated
coefficients better represent losses for
motors greater than 50 hp. (Grundfos,
No. 30 at p. 6) HI stated that it reviewed
the coefficients proposed by DOE
compared to those suggested by HI and
noted only minor deviations in the
calculated PEI. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI
supported the part-load loss factors for
induction motors and controls proposed
by DOE. Id.
For the reasons discussed previously,
and based on stakeholder feedback, DOE
is finalizing the updated induction
motor and control part load loss factor
equation coefficients as proposed and
shown in Table III.1.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
3. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold
With Inverter-Only Motors (With or
Without Controls)
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed that, to the extent that DOE
adopts a definition, test procedure, and
energy conservation standard for
synchronous electric motors that are
inverter-only electric motors, DOE
would reference such regulations in the
pumps test procedure, allowing for the
use of the calculation method by pumps
sold with synchronous electric motors
that are inverter-only electric motors. 87
FR 21268, 21298.
a. Reliance on DOE Motors Test
Procedure and Development of
Coefficients
DOE published a NOPR regarding the
test procedures for motors (‘‘Motors TP
NOPR’’), in which DOE proposed to test
inverter-only synchronous electric
motors (inclusive of the inverter) that
include an inverter in accordance with
section 7.7.2 of IEC 61800–9–2:2017,
using the test provisions specified in
section 7.7.3.5 and testing conditions
specified in section 7.10. 86 FR 71710,
71742 (Dec. 17, 2021). DOE proposed to
test inverter-only synchronous electric
motors that do not include an inverter
in the same manner and to specify that
testing must be performed using an
inverter as recommended in
manufacturer catalogs or offered for sale
with the electric motor. Id. In the April
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to require
the nameplate efficiency of the inverteronly synchronous electric motors tested
in accordance with any relevant test
procedure in subpart B to part 431, if
available, or if not available, in
accordance with the DOE motors test
procedure, should it be finalized. 87 FR
21268, 21298. DOE noted that this
nameplate efficiency, as proposed,
would be representative of the motor +
inverter efficiency rather than just the
motor efficiency. Id.
As proposed in the Motors TP NOPR,
manufacturers of synchronous electric
motors would not be required to test
according to the DOE test procedure, if
finalized, until the compliance date of
energy conservation standards. 86 FR
71710, 71716. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE stated that should it finalize a test
procedure for these motors, there may
be a period of time in which motor
manufacturers would not be required to
publish efficiency information for these
motors. 87 FR 21268, 21298. However,
DOE stated that since the proposed
electric motors test procedure is an IEC
test procedure, if DOE’s proposal in the
Motors TP NOPR were finalized, the
tested efficiency of the synchronous
inverter-only electric motors + inverters
would likely already be available. Id.
Based on this premise, DOE
proceeded to discuss a proposal
regarding development of coefficients
for the calculation method for pumps
sold with inverter-only motors. 87 FR
21268, 21297–21299. DOE noted that in
a submittal responding to the April 2021
RFI, HI stated that it developed
coefficients and calculation
modifications for inverter-only motors
by establishing the incremental loss
delta between power drive systems
operating with induction motors and
power drive systems operating with
inverter-only motors. (HI, No. 22 at pp.
1–2) HI commented that it used actual
motor data from multiple manufacturers
to calculate these coefficients. Id. The
coefficients developed by HI would
require using either IE4 or IE5 minimum
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
b
¥1.3198
¥1.5122
¥0.6629
¥0.7583
c
2.9551
3.0777
2.1452
2.4538
0.1052
0.1847
0.1952
0.2233
efficiencies (IEC 60034–30–2) 33 in the
Section VII calculation for the equipped
motor efficiency in appendix A. Id. HI
also provided limited comparisons of
the recommended inverter-only
calculation method to test data for IE5
products. In five out of six cases, the
calculation method resulted in a PEI
equivalent to or higher than the test
method. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that while it did not have data to
evaluate HI’s part load loss model
quantitatively, DOE did plot HI’s
suggested model and preliminarily
found the resulting trends in losses to be
reasonable in relation to the expected
loss differences between induction and
synchronous electric motors. 87 FR
21268, 21298. Specifically, HI’s
suggested model showed inverter-only
motors to be more efficient at part-load
when compared to DOE’s loss model for
induction motors. Id. Further, HI’s
suggested model showed higher
efficiency at full-load compared to
DOE’s loss model for induction
motors—an expected outcome given
that induction motor efficiency is set at
a NEMA Premium level, whereas
inverter-only efficiency is Super
Premium. Id.
However, DOE identified three
concerns with the HI’s suggested model
which it discussed in the April 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21298. First, the
HI-provided comparison of wire-towater test data with results from the
calculation method using the
recommended coefficients resulted in
one case where the PEI rating
determined using the calculation
method was lower than the PEI rating
determined using the test method. Id.
Second, HI’s proposed coefficients were
based on a delta between induction
motors and inverter-only motors, and
33 The International Electrotechnical Commission
(‘‘IEC’’) standards IEC 60034–30 for variable-speed
electric motors establishes an efficiency
classification system for these motors. Efficiency
classes are designated as IE1, IE2, IE3, IE4, and
IE5.nIE4 is an approximation of super premium
efficiency motors and IE5 is the IEC designation for
ultra-premium efficiency motors.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17956
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DOE did not propose to adopt HI’s
proposed induction motor coefficients
in the April 2022 NOPR. Id. Third, HI’s
coefficients are applicable to motor-only
efficiency, while DOE’s proposed test
procedure for inverter-only motors
includes efficiency for the motor +
inverter combined. Id.
Therefore, DOE proposed in the April
2022 NOPR to make slight modifications
to the inverter-only coefficients
proposed by HI. 87 FR 21268, 21298.
Specifically, DOE started with the
proposed revised DOE induction motor
and control coefficients, then applied
the deltas provided by HI (the difference
in efficiency points between a
synchronous motor + control versus
induction motor + control at different
load points and different hp ranges),
and then normalized to the motor +
control losses (rather than the motor
only losses). Id. Table III.2 shows the
inverter-only motor and control part-
load loss factor coefficients proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR. These coefficients
result in slightly higher losses than the
HI model across all hp. 87 FR 21268,
21298. DOE requested comment on its
proposed inverter-only part-load loss
coefficients, specifically on the
appropriateness of the delta used to
derive these coefficients as well as any
other available comparable motor data
with which DOE could vet these
coefficients. 87 FR 21268, 21299.
TABLE III.2—PROPOSED INVERTER-ONLY MOTOR AND CONTROL PART LOAD LOSS FACTOR EQUATION COEFFICIENTS
Coefficients for induction motor and control part
load loss factor
(zi)
Motor horsepower
(hp)
a
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
≤5 .................................................................................................................................................
>5 and ≤20 ...................................................................................................................................
>20 and ≤50 .................................................................................................................................
>50 and ≤100 ...............................................................................................................................
>100 .............................................................................................................................................
The Efficiency Advocates supported
DOE’s proposal to permit use of a
calculation-based method for pumps
sold with inverter-only motors.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 32 at p. 3)
They commented that inverter-only
motors are highly efficient, and that a
calculation-based method may reduce
testing burden and facilitate adoption of
pumps using these highly efficient
motors. Id.
The CA IOUs supported inverter-only
calculation methods discussed in the
April 2022 NOPR for inverter-only
pumps and added that the operating
points are consistent with observations
on field metered pump load profiles,
operating speed assumptions, and other
industry standards. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at
p. 6) The CA IOUs also agreed that the
proposed coefficients provide
conservative calculation method results,
which do not exceed wire-to-water
measured performance and
recommended DOE finalize the
calculation method. Id. However, the
CA IOUs stated that VFD to motor
harmonic losses on the order of 30
percent is higher than standard practice
or current generation products and
indicated that they plan to submit data
on this topic. Id. No such data were
submitted.
While Grundfos stated that the
method DOE used to determine these
coefficients is reasonable, it suggested
using the manufacturer interview
process to obtain this information from
specific manufacturers under both the
motor and/or pump rules. (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 6) Grundfos stated that it
follows IEC 61800–9–2 for inverter-only
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
motors and publishes combined motor
and inverter efficiency. Id.
HI stated there is currently no
standard methodology or specification
for motor manufacturers to publish
efficiency on the nameplate that
includes motor and drive losses, and it
is not typically available to pump
manufacturers. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI
added that some manufacturers are
measuring and publishing wire-to-shaft
efficiency with inverter-only motors, but
only when integrated by the
manufacturer and this information may
not be on the nameplate. Id.
HI commented that the coefficients
proposed by HI in response to the April
2021 RFI added harmonic and VFD
losses to the motor only losses as
defined in IEC 60034–30–2, and that HI
recommended using IE4 motor
efficiencies (IEC 60034–30–1) as a
default for the synchronous motors. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 6) HI stated it understood
that IEC 60034–30–1 provides tables for
the motor only and IEC 60034–30–2
provides a calculation method to take
IEC 60034–30–1 values and determine
the motor efficiency on the drive by
applying the incremental losses through
calculation. Id. Additionally, HI
responded that the coefficients
proposed by DOE are different than
proposed by industry since they start
with a combined motor and VFD
efficiency, and that this value is not
available to pump manufacturers and
there is no specification for
manufacturers to publish these data. Id.
HI recommended that instead of using a
nameplate value that is not available to
pump manufacturers, DOE (1) use the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
b
¥0.0898
¥0.1591
¥0.4071
¥0.3341
¥0.0749
c
1.0251
1.1683
1.4028
1.3377
1.0864
0.0667
¥0.0085
0.0055
¥0.0023
¥0.0096
IE4 motor only efficiencies as defaults
and specify standard math to add the
VFD losses, or (2) start with IE4 motor
only efficiencies and include the VFD
losses in the coefficients as proposed by
HI in the April 2021 RFI. Id.
NEEA supported the proposed
calculation methodology for inverteronly synchronous motors, but
recommended DOE consider an interim
approach until these motors are covered
by DOE regulations. (NEEA, No. 34 at p.
5) NEEA stated that it will take many
years for the motors test procedure,
should it proceed as written, to take
effect and require testing of
synchronous motors, and that this lag
would cause confusion in the
marketplace and stifle adoption of new
technologies. Id. at 6. NEEA
recommended that DOE incorporate by
reference IEC 60034–2–3 until DOE has
regulations covering these motors. Id.
NEEA added that IEC 60034–2–3 is the
most appropriate motors test procedure
for calculating full load motor efficiency
values, and the values do not include
inverter losses, therefore producing
reasonable full load motor efficiency
values to be used with the values DOE
proposed in Table III.2 of the pumps
NOPR when calculation PERVL.34 Id.
NEEA further recommended that
incorporation of IEC 60034–2–3 should
no longer apply when the motors are
covered by DOE regulations. Id. NEEA
stated that it had no test data with
34 DOE notes that Table III.2 of the April 2022
NOPR included coefficients relative to motor +
inverter efficiency, so it is not clear what NEEA’s
proposal is referring to.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
which to evaluate the coefficients
proposed in Table III.2 in the April 2022
NOPR, but supported the method used
to determine the coefficients. Id.
NEEA additionally recommended that
in the future, DOE consider test
procedures and metrics that better
account for motor and control
performance at various load points.
(NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) NEEA stated that
as more inverter-only and synchronous
motors are developed and deployed,
differentiating motor and control
performance at part load points will
become increasingly important. (NEEA,
No. 34 at p. 7) NEEA noted that IE5level motors can show more variability
at part-load. Id. NEEA recommended
that when IEC 61800–9–2 data are
available, DOE consider revising the
pumps test procedure to incorporate the
specific losses at each load point as
opposed to, or in addition to, the default
loss curves. Id. NEEA stated this would
allow manufacturers to showcase their
improvements in efficiency and allow
for more accurate representation of
losses Id.
On October 19, 2022, following
submission of comments to the April
2022 NOPR, DOE published a final rule
regarding test procedures for motors (the
‘‘Motors TP Final Rule’’), which
adopted a test procedure for inverteronly synchronous motors generally as
proposed in accordance with IEC
61800–9–2:2017.87 FR 63588, 63659.
Since the adopted DOE test procedure
for electric motors relies on motor and
inverter efficiency, and beginning 180
days following publication of that test
procedure, any representations of
energy consumption for those inverteronly synchronous electric motors must
be made in accordance with that test
procedure, DOE has determined that it
would not be appropriate to have a
pumps test procedure that relies on
motor only efficiency for these same
motors. Instead, the pumps test
procedure should rely on motor and
inverter efficiency tested in accordance
with the DOE electric motors test
procedure, consistent with the existing
test procedure for pumps sold with
induction motors. As such, DOE is
finalizing the pump test procedure as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR, to be
based on motor and inverter efficiency
rather than motor only efficiency. DOE
acknowledges that there will be a period
of time in which motor and inverter
efficiency is not required to be
published by motor manufacturers,
however, DOE is also declining to
develop an interim test procedure. This
approach will limit potential deviation
between interim ratings and any ratings
post motor-standard, should one be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
finalized, which could cause market
confusion, and will allow pump
manufacturers to use motor and inverter
data when available. Now that the DOE
motors test procedure is final, there is
more certainty in the market than there
was at the time of the April 2022 NOPR,
and motor manufacturers may choose to
make representations early or upon
request of their customers. DOE notes
that many motor manufacturers are
currently making representations
regarding the energy efficiency of their
inverter-only synchronous electric
motors, and in order to continue doing
so after the 180-day mark, those
representations must be of motor and
inverter efficiency in accordance with
the DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE
expects such information to be
relatively widely available. DOE is also
finalizing an AEDM option for pumps,
as discussed in section III.I.2. With this
option, pump manufacturers may use
their own calculation method, relying
on any available data and coefficients
they have, including potentially HI or
NEEA’s recommended approach, as long
as such calculation meets the AEDM
requirements, as discussed in section
III.1.2. In addition, as DOE received no
comment on the coefficients excluding
the request to base them on motor-only
efficiency, DOE is finalizing the
coefficients as proposed.
b. Denominator for PEI Metric
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that the appropriate denominator for
pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors is the same
as for other pumps sold with motors
with or without controls (i.e., the
efficiency standards for NEMA Design B
motors in 10 CFR 431.25 is comparable
to the PEI metric when comparing
pumps across a common baseline). 87
FR 21268, 21298. Consequently, DOE
did not propose a revision to the
calculation of PERSTD for these pumps.
Id.
DOE received no comments on this
issue and is finalizing the denominator
as proposed.
c. Applicability
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed that, to the extent that the
calculation-based method would be
applicable to pumps sold with
synchronous electric motors that are
inverter-only electric motors, such
provision would apply to pumps sold
with inverter-only synchronous electric
motors both with and without controls.
87 FR 21268, 21299. DOE also proposed
that pumps sold with inverter-only
motors with or without controls would
apply the testing-based approach in
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17957
section VI of appendix A (for pumps
sold with motors and controls) rather
than in section IV of appendix A (for
pumps sold with motors), given that
section VI results in PEIVL, and DOE
assumed that such pumps, even if sold
without an inverter, would be tested
with an inverter. Id. DOE requested
comment on its proposal to apply PEIVL
to pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous motors without controls,
including application of the testing
method in section VI of appendix A and
the calculation method in section VII of
appendix A. Id.
Grundfos agreed with the proposal.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) HI agreed with
the proposal to apply PEIVL ratings to
pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous motors without controls,
assuming they would use section VII of
appendix A. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7)
However, HI disagreed with section
VII.A.2, ‘‘Pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors regulated
by DOE’s energy conservation standards
in subpart B of this part,’’ stating that
DOE should allow use of the calculation
method using IE4 efficiency from IEC
60034–30–1, since most (if not all)
synchronous inverter-only motors will
meet the IE4 level. Id. HI also disagreed
with sections V.A.2 and VII.A.3, ‘‘SVIL
pumps sold with small electric motors
regulated by DOE’s energy conservation
standards at § 431.446 or with small
non-small-electric-motor electric motors
(‘‘SNEMs’’) regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards in subpart B of
this part (but including motors of such
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and
continuous controls,’’ stating that DOE
should continue to allow use of the
calculation method for non-DOE
regulated small or SNEM motors as
referenced in previous comments by
creating coefficients specific to these
motor types for section VII calculations.
Id.
Based on the comments received,
DOE is finalizing its proposal to apply
PEIVL to pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous motors without controls,
including application of the testing
method in section VI of appendix A and
the calculation method in section VII of
appendix A. DOE has addressed HI’s
concern with respect to their proposed
IE4-based calculation method in section
III.F.3.a of this document and discusses
the concern regarding small or SNEM
motors in section III.G of this document.
4. Pumps Sold With Submersible
Motors
For pumps sold with submersible
motors, the calculation of PERSTD, the
test procedure for bare pumps, the
calculation-based approach for pumps
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
17958
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
sold with motors, and the calculationbased approach for pumps sold with
motors and controls all include
reference to Table 2 of appendix A,
which includes default nominal fullload submersible motor efficiency
values. These motor efficiency values
were developed to allow for pumps sold
with submersible motors to be rated
using calculation-based methods despite
the fact that submersible motors are not
included in DOE’s current motor
regulations. In the Motors TP NOPR,
DOE proposed a test procedure for
submersible motors based on section
34.4 of NEMA MG1–2016 with its 2018
Supplements. 86 FR 71725, 71749–
71750. DOE noted in the April 2022
NOPR that it had not established energy
conservation standards for submersible
motors, and that were DOE to establish
a test procedure for submersible motors,
such motors would not be required to be
tested according to the DOE test
procedure until such time that
compliance with any energy
conservation standards that DOE may
establish is required. 87 FR 21268,
21299.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed that for the calculation-based
approaches for submersible pumps sold
with motors (with or without controls),
for determination of PERCL and PERVL,
the default efficiency values in Table 2
of appendix A would be used until
compliance with an energy conservation
standard for submersible motors is
required, should such a standard be
established. 87 FR 21268, 21299. At
such time, calculation of the pump
efficiency for submersible pumps would
rely on the motor efficiency rating
marked on the nameplate and tested in
accordance with the relevant DOE test
procedure. Id. DOE further proposed
that if DOE finalized a test procedure for
submersible pumps, prior to any
required compliance with an energy
conservation standard that DOE may
establish for these pumps, a
manufacturer may rely on the motor
efficiency represented by the motor
manufacturer, if such a representation
were made, or the default values in
Table 2 of appendix A. Id.
DOE also proposed in the April 2022
NOPR that when determining PERSTD
using the calculation-based approach for
bare pumps, before the compliance date
of any future standards for submersible
electric motors that publishes after
January 1, 2021, the default efficiency
values in Table 2 of appendix A would
be used. 87 FR 21268, 21299–21300.
After the compliance date of any
standards for submersible electric
motors that publishes after January 1,
2021, any standards applicable to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
submersible motors in appendix B of
part 431 would be used. 87 FR 21268,
21300. DOE requested comment on its
proposal for the calculation-based
approach for pumps sold with
submersible pumps to require use of the
rated motor efficiency marked on the
nameplate that has been tested in
accordance with the relevant DOE test
procedure after such time as compliance
is required with an energy conservation
standard for submersible motors, should
such a standard be established. Id.
Grundfos commented that this
approach would be in line with the
current requirements for pump testing
using DOE regulated product and agreed
with the approach. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 7) However, Grundfos stated that
Section 34.4 of NEMA MG1–2016 is an
inadequate test procedure for
submersible motors. Id.
HI responded that, consistent with its
comments on the Motors TP NOPR,
which stated that the proposed
submersible motor test procedure was
inadequate, it does not believe this
language is warranted at this time. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 7) Thus, HI recommended
that no changes to the test procedure for
pumps sold with submersible motors be
made at this time. Id.
In the Motors TP Final Rule, DOE did
not finalize a test procedure for
submersible motors. 87 FR 63588,
63605. However, DOE notes that the
proposed provision in the pumps test
procedure relates to any future
standards for submersible motors, and
as Grundfos stated, the approach is in
line with the current requirements for
pump testing with motors covered by
DOE. As such, DOE is finalizing the
provision as proposed, noting that it
will have no impact if and until a future
motors rulemaking adopts a test
procedure and/or standard for
submersible motors.
G. Test Procedure for SVIL Pumps
In this final rule, DOE is expanding
the scope of the test procedure to
include SVIL pumps. DOE reviewed the
general pumps test procedure as
finalized in this rule to determine if any
modifications were necessary to
accommodate SVIL pumps. The
amended test procedure is based on the
test methods contained in HI 40.6–2021,
which DOE has determined also applies
to SVIL pumps.
As discussed in section III.F, the
general pumps test procedure also
contains methods to determine the
appropriate PEI using either calculationbased methods or testing-based
methods. DOE has determined that
these calculation- and testing-based
methods are applicable to SVIL pumps
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
just as they are applicable to IL pumps,
based on the configuration in which the
pump is being sold (i.e., since SVIL
pumps are sold as pumps with motors
or pumps with motors and controls, the
test methods enumerated in Table 1 to
Appendix A apply to SVIL pumps).
Additionally, the determination of
pump performance in the pumps test
procedure, as amended in this final rule,
would be appropriate for SVIL pumps.
1. Applicable Motor Regulations
The primary differences between
SVIL and IL pumps affecting the
application of DOE’s general pumps test
procedure are the size and certain
characteristics of the motor with which
the SVIL pumps are rated. DOE notes
that SVIL pumps, which this final rule
defines as pumps having shaft input
power less than 1 hp, may be paired
with motors that are less than 1 hp and,
as such, are not subject to DOE’s electric
motor regulations specified at 10 CFR
431.25. However, some motors less than
1 hp are subject to DOE’s small electric
motor regulations specified at 10 CFR
431.446.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that its motor regulations at 10 CFR
431.446 exclude totally enclosed fancooled electric motors (‘‘TEFC’’) and
certain other motors considered to be
non-general purpose motors, which
pump manufacturers had noted are
frequently paired with SVIL pumps. 87
FR 21268, 21301. DOE stated that in the
Motors TP NOPR, it had proposed
adding such motors to the scope of
electric motors coverage under the term
small non-small electric motor electric
motors (‘‘SNEMs’’). Specifically, DOE
proposed to define SNEMs as agnostic
to enclosure and topology, affirmatively
stating that the proposed test procedure
would apply to general-purpose,
definite-purpose, and special-purpose
motors. As proposed, SNEMs would
include fractional horsepower motors as
low as 0.25 hp. 86 FR 71710, 71721–
71725. The Motors TP NOPR also
proposed testing instructions specific to
these motors. 86 FR 71710, 71739. DOE
noted that it had not established energy
conservation standards for SNEMs, and
that were DOE to establish a test
procedure for SNEMs, such motors
would not be required to test according
to the DOE test procedure until such
time as compliance with any energy
conservation standards be required,
should such standards be established.
Under DOE’s Motors TP NOPR, any
definitions, test procedures, and
standards finalized for SNEMs would be
in found in subpart B of part 431. 87 FR
21268, 21301.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that it expected that the proposed
definition and test procedure for
SNEMs, as well as the proposed test
procedure for inverter-only synchronous
electric motors, as discussed in section
III.F.3, would encompass the additional
types of motors discussed by
stakeholders that are not currently
covered by the standards at 10 CFR
431.446. Therefore, DOE proposed that
where the calculation-based test
methods refer to the ‘‘represented
nominal full-load motor efficiency (i.e.,
nameplate/DOE-certified value),’’ the
nominal full-load motor efficiency for
an SVIL pump would be determined in
accordance with the applicable test
procedure in 10 CFR 431.444 or in
subpart B of part 431.87 FR 21268,
21301.
DOE also proposed that for SVIL
pumps, the determination of PERSTD
would reference DOE’s small electric
motor regulations at 10 CFR 431.446
rather than the electric motor
regulations at 10 CFR 431.25, and would
be the minimum efficiency of the energy
conservation standards for polyphase or
single-phase (CSIR/CSCR) for the
relevant number of poles and motor
horsepower. 87 FR 21268, 21301. The
single-phase standards only apply to
CSCR and CSIR but the proposal would
apply the efficiency values found at 10
CFR 431.446 when determining an SVIL
pump’s PERSTD. Id. DOE stated that it
believed that these values represent an
appropriate default for the SVIL market.
Id. DOE also stated that it would also
consider application of efficiency values
found for specific SNEMs in subpart B
of part 431, if the relevant proposed
amendments contained in the Motors
TP NOPR were finalized. Id. DOE stated
that its information did not indicate that
SVIL pumps are sold as bare pumps, but
that if stakeholders identify such
models, DOE would include these same
provisions in the calculation method for
bare pumps. Id.
DOE sought comment on whether the
efficiency standards found at 10 CFR
431.446 are appropriate for use in the
determination of PERSTD for SVILs,
whether certain motor topologies that
would be classified as SNEM are more
prevalent and significantly less efficient,
and whether the minimum efficiency of
the polyphase and CSCR/CSIR
standards for the relevant number of
poles and motor horsepower is
appropriate or whether there should be
differences depending on the phase of
the motor with which the pump is sold.
87 FR 21268, 21301.
HI and Grundfos stated that motor
efficiencies found in 10 CFR 431.446 are
not the lowest for topologies used in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
SVIL pumps and are inappropriate for
determining PERSTD for SVIL products.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 7; Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 7) HI and Grundfos stated that DOE
must create a minimum efficiency table,
similar to that created for submersible
motors, to capture the minimums across
the motor sizes covered by the SVIL
products. Id.
NEEA supported DOE’s
recommendation for the test procedure
for SVILs, but stated that they were
concerned that the SNEM rulemaking
will not conclude in sufficient time to
allow for incorporation of those test
procedures and standards into this
rulemaking, creating a gap during which
manufacturers would not have a
calculation-based approach. (NEEA, No.
34 at p. 5) NEEA recommended that
DOE add an additional calculationbased approach for SVIL pumps sold
with motors not covered by the motors
standard or test procedure at 10 CFR
431.446. Id. NEEA recommended that
DOE embed a calculation approach for
SVILs that uses IE2 efficiency levels to
determine full load motor efficiency, as
described in IEC 60034–30–1. Id. NEEA
stated that these values are appropriate
because the motors are not currently
covered by a standard, so a conservative
value would use an efficiency level
below the standard for covered motors
of similar sizes, and would not
disadvantage manufacturers that choose
to wire-to-water test equipment. Id.
NEEA stated that once any motor TP or
standard is in place and covering
additional motor types, the embedded
calculation-based methodology would
no longer be valid. Id.
Following receipt of comments, DOE
published the Motors TP final rule,
which adopted a test procedure for
SNEMs in appendix B to subpart B of
part 431.87 FR 63588, 63657–63660.
However, DOE has yet to adopt any
energy conservation standards for
SNEM. As a result, there are not
currently minimum efficiency values for
SNEMs on which DOE could base the
calculation of PERSTD for SVIL.
DOE acknowledges that in the
proposed approach, SVIL paired with
SNEM may have worse PER ratings than
SVIL paired with small electric motors
(‘‘SEM’’), given that some SNEMs
currently have lower efficiency that
DOE’s minimum requirements for
SEMs. However, this is representative of
the energy use of such an SVIL. In
addition, DOE notes that the test
procedure does not set a standard for
SVIL, and that any calculated PERSTD is
just a reference point. If or when DOE
considers setting standards for SVIL,
DOE may consider a PEI other than 1.00
as appropriate for this equipment
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17959
category—depending on the timing and
finalization of any DOE standards
related to SNEM, and the relationship of
SNEM to SEM minimum efficiency.
Therefore, HI and Grundfos’ concern
regarding the lower efficiency of SNEM
as compared to SEM can be ameliorated.
DOE acknowledges that motor
manufacturers will not be required to
publish full-load motor efficiency for a
given SNEM until the compliance date
of any standards for SNEM. However,
DOE is declining to develop an interim
approach as suggested by NEEA, and is
adopting the provisions for motor
efficiency in SVIL calculations as
proposed. As discussed regarding
inverter-only motors in section III.F.3,
this approach will limit potential
deviation between interim ratings and
ratings post motor-standard, if any,
which could cause market confusion,
and will allow manufacturers to use
SNEM motor efficiency when available.
Now that the DOE motors test procedure
is final, there is more certainty in the
market than there was at the time of the
April 2022 NOPR, and motor
manufacturers may choose to make
representations in accordance with the
DOE test procedure early such as at the
request of customers, or if they are
already making representations of
energy use or energy efficiency and
wish to continue doing so past the 180
day mark following publication of the
DOE motors test procedure. DOE is also
finalizing an AEDM option for pumps,
as discussed in section III.I.2 of this
document. With this option, pump
manufacturers may use their own
calculation method, relying on any
available data and coefficients they
have, including potentially NEEA’s
recommended approach, as long as such
calculation meets the AEDM
requirements, as discussed in section
III.1.2.
Since the April 2022 NOPR, DOE has
also determined through manufacturer
interviews that a small percent of
pumps are sold as bare pumps.
Therefore, DOE is adopting the same
provisions relevant to SVIL in the
calculation method for bare pumps.
2. SVIL Paired With Motors Less Than
0.25 Horsepower
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that its market research indicates that
the vast majority of SVILs are sold with
motors with a nominal horsepower of
0.25 hp or greater. 87 FR 21268, 21301.
However, DOE identified some models
with horsepower closer to 0.125 hp. Id.
Such motors are not subject to the
standards in 10 CFR 431.446 and are not
proposed to be subject to any test
procedure in the Motors TP NOPR. Id.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17960
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DOE proposed that for determination of
PERSTD for SVILs sold with a motor
nominal horsepower of less than 0.25
hp, the full-load efficiency values in
Table III.3 would be used. Id. DOE
scaled these values from the standards
for 0.25 hp pumps (3.9 efficiency point
decrease, comparable to the most
common decrease from 0.33 to 0.25 hp)
and taken the minimum value across
polyphase and CSCR/CSIR motors. Id.
DOE also proposed that the nominal
full-load motor efficiency for SVILs
would be determined in accordance
with the applicable test procedure in 10
CFR 431.444 or in subpart B of part 431,
although such test procedure is not
required for those motors. Id. DOE
stated that it may consider alternate
methods of determining motor
efficiency for motors less than 0.25 hp,
or if there is no appropriate test
procedure, DOE may consider requiring
SVILs sold with such motors to use a
testing-based approach. Id. DOE sought
comment on: (1) how many models of
SVILs are sold with motors with a
nominal horsepower less than 0.25 hp,
(2) whether such motors could be tested
in accordance with the relevant test
procedures in 10 CFR 431.446 or
proposed in the Motors TP NOPR, and
if not, how such motors are tested, and
(3) whether the efficiency values in
Table III.3 are appropriate for such
motors, and if not, how those values
should be determined. Id.
TABLE III.3—AVERAGE FULL LOAD EFFICIENCY FOR SVILS LESS THAN 0.25 HP
Average full-load efficiency
Motor horsepower
Open motors (number of poles)
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
<0.25 ............................................................................................................................................
Grundfos stated that SVIL sales data
was provided as part of the
manufacturer interview process.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7–8) For testing
of motors, Grundfos suggested DOE
implement the process the EU follows
by publishing coefficients for these
motors and allowing for development of
manufacturer specified coefficients,
where required. Id. Grundfos stated that
Table III.3 using a 3.9 percent decrease
is insufficient and again recommended
that DOE create a minimum efficiency
table like that for submersible motors.
Id.
HI recommended that DOE reference
manufacturer interviews with regard to
sales data. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) HI did not
agree with DOE’s methodology for Part
3 and the limited topologies used in the
scaling. Id. HI noted that this approach
misses less efficient motor topologies
that are selected because the product’s
market price point. Id.
China stated that DOE did not specify
the number of motor phases applicable
to SVILs less than 0.25 hp, and
suggested that DOE clarify the phase
requirement for these motors and set up
separate energy efficiency indicators for
motors with different phase numbers.
(China, No. 29 at p. 4)
Given that DOE is adopting the
efficiencies found in 10 CFR 431.446 as
discussed in section III.G.1, and for the
reasons discussed in that section, DOE
is also adopting the proposed
efficiencies derived from those values as
shown in Table III.3. This will allow the
ratings for SVIL with motors less than
0.25 hp to be rated consistently with
SVIL with larger motors.
DOE notes that neither Grundfos nor
HI explicitly stated whether such
motors could be tested in accordance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
with the relevant test procedures in 10
CFR 431.446 or proposed in the Motors
TP NOPR. Grundfos suggested that DOE
publish coefficients and allow for
manufacturer specified coefficients,
where necessary. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
7–8) DOE does not have data available
with which to develop default efficiency
values for these motors. In addition,
DOE notes that manufacturers have the
ability to develop their own coefficients
using an AEDM approach, as discussed
in section III.I. For this reason, DOE is
adopting its proposal that the nominal
full-load motor efficiency for SVILs
would be determined in accordance
with the applicable test procedure in 10
CFR 431.444 or in subpart B of part 431.
DOE notes that if this value is not
available, manufacturers may choose to
wire-to-water test and/or to use an
AEDM.
In response to China, the test
procedure proposed in the April 2022
NOPR and adopted in this final rule
does not restrict the number of phases
for motors paired with SVILs.
3. SVIL Paired With Other Motors Not
Covered by DOE Regulations
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that it expected that the existing
regulations for small electric motors at
10 CFR 431.446, as well as any finalized
regulations for SNEMs and inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, would
account for the vast majority of motors
sold with SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268,
21302. However, DOE proposed that any
SVIL pumps that are distributed in
commerce with motors that are not
regulated by DOE’s electric motor
regulations at 10 CFR 431.25, DOE’s
small electric motor regulations at 10
CFR 431.446, or any electric motor
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
6
4
2
58.3
64.6
61.7
regulations in subpart B to part 431
established after January 1, 2022, as
applicable, would need to apply the
testing-based methods currently
specified in sections IV and VI of
appendix A and as proposed to be
modified in the proposed rule. Id. Given
that DOE proposed for PERSTD to
reference motor efficiencies relevant to
SVIL pumps, DOE proposed not to have
an option for SVIL pumps sold with
single-phase motors to be rated as bare
pumps. Id.
If regulations for SNEMs and inverteronly synchronous electric motors are
not set, DOE stated that it may consider
allowing an option for SVIL pumps sold
with single-phase motors to be rated as
bare pumps. In this case, DOE would
reference the efficiency values in 10
CFR 431.446 to determine bare pump
performance. 87 FR 21268, 21302.
DOE sought comment on its proposal
to require testing of SVIL pumps
distributed in commerce with motors
not regulated by DOE’s current electric
motor regulations or any motor
regulations finalized after January 1,
2022. 87 FR 21268, 21302. DOE also
sought comment on whether it should
allow such pumps to be rated as bare
pumps only if any motor regulations
finalized after January 1, 2022, do not
include SNEMs and inverter-only
synchronous electric motors. Id.
Grundfos stated that DOE should
consider the impact of this mandatory
testing-based approach if motor
regulations are not finalized for motors
used in SVIL products. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 8) Grundfos added that the
testing burden would exceed the burden
the inverter-only calculation method
was created to eliminate, due to the
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
basic model ‘band rule’ and varying
motor topologies used in SVIL. Id.
HI disagreed with sections V.A.2 and
VII.A.3 and recommended that DOE
should continue to allow the calculation
method for non-DOE regulated small,
SNEM motors, or inverter-only motors
by creating coefficients specific to these
motor types for Section VII calculation.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 8)
Following comments received on the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE published the
Motors TP Final Rule, which adopted
test procedures for SNEM and inverteronly synchronous motors in Appendix
B to Subpart B of part 431. 87 FR 63588,
63657–63660. At the time of publication
of this final rule, DOE has not adopted
any energy conservation standards for
SNEM or inverter-only synchronous
motors. As discussed, DOE believes that
the test procedures for SEM, SNEM, and
inverter-only synchronous motors
would account for the vast majority of
motors sold with SVIL pumps. For this
reason, DOE adopts its proposal to limit
the calculation methods to SVIL sold
with motors subject to a DOE test
procedure, and to require testing of
SVIL pumps distributed in commerce
with motors not regulated by DOE’s
current electric motor regulations or any
motor test procedure and/or energy
conservation standards finalized after
January 1, 2022. DOE notes that such
SVIL pumps could also be rated using
an AEDM, as discussed in section III.I
of this document.
4. Part-Load Loss Curves
As stated in section III.F.1, the general
pumps test procedure includes
calculation-based methods that specify
part-load loss curves for pumps sold
with motors, accounting for the partload losses of the motor at each load
point, as well as part-load loss curves
for pumps sold with motors and
continuous controls, which account for
additional losses.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that it understood that part-load loss
curves (i.e., the variation in efficiency as
a function of load) do not vary
significantly between 1 hp motors and
drives and motors and drives that are
less than 1 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21302. DOE
stated that it did not receive any newer
data or any indication that the SVIL
market has changed such that data
collected in 2017 would no longer be
applicable. Id. DOE did not propose to
revise its part-load loss curves for
motors and drives less than 5 hp.
Therefore, DOE proposed to apply the
existing motor and combined motor and
drive part-load loss curves that are
applicable to 1 hp motors and drives to
the fractional horsepower motors and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
drives with which SVIL pumps may be
sold. Id. DOE noted that IEC standards
do not include motors below 3⁄4 kw (1
hp), and that many SVIL pumps may
use integrated packages rather than
separate motors and drives—and may be
specific to each manufacturer. Id.
Consequently, there may be more
variation in losses across manufacturers
or models compared to larger hp motors
and drives. Id. As discussed in section
III.I.2, DOE proposed to allow use of
AEDMs for pumps. DOE stated that in
cases where a manufacturer wishes to
use an alternative to the part-load loss
coefficient method, it may choose to
perform wire-to-water testing of SVILs
or employ an AEDM under DOE’s
proposal. Id.
DOE sought comment on whether the
market for SVIL pumps has changed
such that the data collected by DOE in
2017 would no longer be applicable,
and whether the use of AEDM would
address concerns related to part-load
loss curves specific to low-horsepower
motors. 87 FR 21268, 21302.
Grundfos stated that data was
submitted as part of the manufacturer
interview process. (Grundfos, No .31 at
p. 8) Grundfos added that because the
calculated method should remain,
allowing AEDM will not solve the issue
of part-load loss curves for SVIL
products in the short term. Id.
HI did not believe the market has
changed since 2017, but suggested that
DOE consider manufacturer interviews.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 8) HI recommended
that DOE conduct research on the part
load loss factors for these lower
horsepower motors to inform the
calculation method. Id. HI stated that
the use of AEDM to improve the part
load loss calculation would increase
burden compared to a calculation
method. Id.
NEEA recommended that DOE rely on
market data already in its possession
from previous rulemaking proceedings.
(NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) NEEA stated that
this data, made public in 2017, is recent
enough that it represents the current
market for this pump class. Id. NEEA
stated that considering the viability of
DOE’s data and similarity to covered
pump classes, there is no reason to
delay this rulemaking further with an
additional round of data acquisition and
analysis. Id. NEEA recommended that
DOE proceed with data from 2017. Id.
DOE has not received any additional
data indicating that the part-load loss
curves for SVIL with motors less than 1
hp should be any different than those
for SVIL paired with1 hp motors.
Therefore, DOE is finalizing the partload loss curve as proposed, consistent
with NEEA’s suggestion. Regarding HI
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17961
and Grundfos’ concern with the added
burden of an AEDM as compared to a
calculation approach, as discussed
previously, an AEDM could be as
simple as the calculation method that
includes different part load loss
coefficients. If such data are available to
manufacturers, there should be no
additional burden. If such data are not
available, manufacturers can rely on the
calculation method.
H. Test Procedure for Other Expanded
Scope Pumps
DOE has evaluated the amended test
procedure as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR to determine if modifications are
necessary to accommodate RSH, and VT
pumps, pumps designed to operate with
6-pole induction motors, and pumps
designed to operate with non-induction
motors with an operating range greater
than or equal to 960 rpm and less than
1,440 rpm (‘‘pumps tested with a
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm’’). 87 FR
21268, 21302–21303.
1. Testing Other Expanded Scope
Pumps to HI 40.6
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that the
amended test procedure is applicable to
BB, RSH, and VT pumps, as well as to
pumps tested with a nominal speed of
1,200 rpm for determining pump
performance. 87 FR 21268, 21302. As
discussed in section III.C.1, DOE is
updating its test procedure to reference
HI 40.6–2021. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE requested comment on its
proposed test procedure for BB, RSH,
and VT pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
Grundfos agreed that the proposed test
procedure for BB, RSH, and VT pumps
is appropriate. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
8) HI commented that, in general, BB,
RSH, and VT pumps can be tested using
HI 40.6–2021 without modification. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 1, 8) HI also commented
that HI 40.6–2021 is fully applicable to
VS1 and VS3 35 pump types. (HI, No. 33
at pp. 2–3) HI stated that in general, for
any discharge through column pump,
DOE must focus on bowl or pump
efficiency that excludes the column
friction losses and line-shaft bearing
losses. Id.
China recommended that DOE use the
current test procedure for testing RSH
pumps since RSH pumps work similarly
to RSV pumps. (China, No. 29 at p. 4)
DOE interprets the comment from China
to mean that the test procedure for RSV
pumps should be identical to that for
35 VS1 and VS3 pumps are HI pump categories
that meet the DOE definition of a vertical turbine
pump.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17962
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
RSH pumps, which is consistent with
DOE’s proposal in the April 2022 NOPR.
The CA IOUs and China agreed that
HI 40.6–2021, as written, can be used to
test between bearing pumps. (CA IOUs,
No. 32 at p. 3; China, No. 29 at p. 4) HI
explained that there are two industry
definitions for determining specific
speed that potentially apply to BB
pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 1) HI
encouraged DOE to clarify in its data
gathering for BB pumps that BEP flow
rate used to determine specific speed for
double-inlet impellers products is
calculated using BEP flow divided by 2.
Id. Further, HI stated that BB1 pumps
are not as abundant as other in-scope
pumps, and there will be limited
samples available for testing of basic
models. Id.
DOE acknowledges that VT pumps are
sold in many configurations, making it
unrealistic to consider all potential shaft
depths during testing. To clarify DOE’s
intent and to reduce unnecessary test
burden, DOE is therefore revising the
test procedure language proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR to explicitly state that
when testing VT pumps, only the bowl
performance should be measured, as
specified in section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6–
2021.
Since DOE is not including BB pumps
in the scope of this test procedure, DOE
is not adopting any changes to the
calculation of specific speed.
Aside from the minor revisions
discussed in the preceding paragraphs,
DOE is adopting the remainder of the
test procedures for RSH, and VT pumps,
as well as to pumps tested with a
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm as proposed
in the April 2022 NOPR.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
2. Testing Other Expanded Scope
Pumps With Motors
As discussed in section III.F, the
pumps test procedure contains methods
for determining PEI using either a
calculation-based or a testing-based
method. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that these
calculation- and testing-based methods
are applicable to BB, RSH, and VT
pumps, as well as pumps tested with a
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm and would
be applied in the same way that they are
applied to other pumps. DOE
understands that the motors paired with
BB, RSH, and VT pumps are typically
similar to those paired with pumps that
are currently in scope. 87 FR 21268,
21302. As such, DOE tentatively
determined that Table 1 and the
relevant test and calculation options are
appropriate for these expanded scope
pumps and that no modifications are
needed. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on whether motors
typically sold with BB, RSH and VT
pumps are subject to DOE’s electric
motor standards. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
See 10 CFR 431.25. In response, HI
agreed that the motors sold with BB,
RSH, and VT pumps are currently
regulated motors, and that Table 1 with
relevant calculation and testing options
are appropriate. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8).
DOE has determined that Table 1 and
the relevant test and calculation options
as adopted in this final rule are
appropriate for these expanded scope
pumps.
In the April 2022 NOPR DOE
tentatively determined that the existing
test procedure references to 10 CFR
431.25 for nominal full load motor
efficiencies are appropriate for 6-pole
motors since 10 CFR 431.25 includes
efficiencies for 6-pole motors. 87 FR
21268, 21303. Additionally, DOE
determined that the part-load loss
factors in Table 4 of appendix A, as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR are
appropriate. Id. As a result, DOE did not
propose to revise these references and
part load loss factors.
The current DOE test procedure
references Table 2 of appendix A for
determining default full load
submersible motor efficiencies. Table 2
does not currently provide default full
load submersible motor efficiencies for
6-pole motors. In the April 2022 NOPR,
DOE proposed to expand Table 2 to
include such values. 87 FR 21268,
21303.
DOE requested comment on its
proposed default submersible motor
efficiency values for 6-pole motors in
the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268,
21303. In response, HI stated it does not
have sufficient data to provide a
response since the number of 6-pole ST
pumps sold is very small and it does not
expect that regulating 6-pole ST pumps
will result in any measurable energy
savings (HI, No. 33 at p. 8).
DOE did not receive any alternative 6pole motor coefficients or data to
support the development of 6-pole
submersible motor coefficients. As such,
DOE is adopting the 6-pole submersible
motor coefficients as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR. As discussed in
section III.F.3, Table 2 may be replaced
with energy conservation standard
values for submersible motors if such
standards are ever developed and
adopted.
DOE acknowledges that ST pumps
that use 6-pole motors are not common;
however, to ensure consistent coverage
across ST pump families, prevent
potential loopholes, and provide
consumers with information to compare
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the performance of these pumps, DOE is
including them in the scope of this test
procedure. DOE will evaluate potential
energy savings in the ongoing pumps
energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
I. Sampling Plan, AEDMs, Enforcement
Provisions, and Basic Model
1. Sampling Plan for Determining
Represented Values
DOE currently provides sampling
plans for all covered equipment that
manufacturers must use when certifying
their equipment as compliant with the
relevant standards and when making
written representations of energy
consumption and efficiency. (See
generally 10 CFR parts 429 and 431) In
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that
SVIL, RSH, VT, and BB pumps are
expected to have the same testing
uncertainty and manufacturing
variability as IL, RSV, ST and endsuction pumps, respectively, since they
are similar in construction and design
and would apply the same test
procedure under DOE’s proposal. 87 FR
21268, 21303. Additionally, DOE
discussed in the April 2022 NOPR that
it expects pumps tested at a nominal
speed of 1,200 rpm would have the
same testing uncertainty and
manufacturing variability as pumps that
are currently regulated and tested at
nominal speeds of 1,800 rpm and 3,600
rpm. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on whether SVIL,
BB, RSH, VT, and pumps tested at a
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm have the
same testing uncertainty and
manufacturing variability as currently
regulated pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
DOE also requested comment on its
proposal to adopt the same statistical
sampling plans which are currently in
place for commercial industrial pumps
for SVIL, BB, RSH, VT, and pumps
tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm.
Id.
HI and Grundfos agreed that testing
uncertainty and manufacturing
variability are similar for expandedscope pumps and for those currently in
scope, and that it is reasonable to adopt
the same statistical sampling plans for
the expanded-scope pumps. (HI, No. 33
at p. 8; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the
statistical sampling plans for expandedscope pumps (i.e., SVIL, RSH, VT, and
1,200 rpm pumps) as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR.
For purposes of certification testing,
determining whether a basic model
complies with the applicable energy
conservation standard is based on
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
testing using the DOE test procedure
and sampling plan. The general
sampling requirement currently
applicable to all covered products and
equipment provides that a sample of
sufficient size must be randomly
selected and tested to ensure
compliance and that, unless otherwise
specified, a minimum of two units must
be tested to certify a basic model as
compliant. 10 CFR 429.11. This
minimum is implicit in the requirement
to calculate a mean—an average—that
requires at least two values. However, if
only one unit of a basic model is
produced, that single unit must be
tested, and the test results must
demonstrate that the basic model
performs at or better than the applicable
standards. Id. Subsequently, if one or
more units of the basic model are
manufactured, compliance with the
default sampling and representations
provisions is required. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to expand the requirements in
10 CFR 429.11 to SVIL, BB, RSH, VT,
and 1,200 rpm pumps. 87 FR 21268,
21303. DOE discussed that
manufacturers may need to test a
sample of more than two units
depending on the variability of their
sample, as provided by the statistical
sampling plan. Id.
Additionally, the current certification
requirements state that other
performance parameters derived from
the test procedure must be reported, but
provides no sampling plan for these
other parameters, which include: pump
total head in feet at BEP and nominal
speed, volume per unit time (i.e., flow
rate) in gallons per minute at BEP and
nominal speed, and calculated driver
power input at each load point (i.e.,
corrected to nominal speed in
horsepower). 10 CFR 429.59(b)(2).
Regarding representative values other
than PEI and PER, DOE proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR that if more than one
unit is tested for a given sample,
represented values (other than PEI and
PER) would be determined using the
arithmetic mean of the individual units.
87 FR 21268, 21303. For example, if
three units are tested for a given sample,
and pump total head at BEP is measured
at 99.1 ft, 96.2 ft, and 97.3 ft, the
reported values for head would be the
sum of the three values divided by three
(i.e., 97.5 ft). Id. This proposal applied
to both the existing and proposed
expanded scope of pumps that would be
addressed by the pumps test procedure.
Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its proposed
statistical sampling procedures and
representation requirements for SVIL,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
BB, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps. 87
FR 21268, 21303. Grundfos agreed with
the proposal. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9)
HI stated that 1,200 rpm pumps will
take longer and cost more to
manufacture and test since they are
physically larger pumps. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 8) HI additionally commented that
two samples will not be available for
test in many cases, in which case
published data will be the result of a
single sample. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) As
discussed previously, the language in 10
CFR 429.11 addresses the sampling plan
for a basic model when only a single
sample is available for test. Further, as
discussed in section III.I.2, DOE is
adopting AEDM provisions that allow a
pump manufacturer to certify basic
models, including low-volume basic
models, using a validated AEDM.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the
statistical sampling procedures and
representation requirements for SVIL,
RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. Since
DOE is not including BB pumps in the
scope of this test procedure, DOE is not
adopting statistical sampling procedures
for them.
2. Alternative Efficiency Determination
Methods
Pursuant to the requirements of 10
CFR 429.70, DOE may permit use of an
AEDM in cases where actual testing of
regulated equipment may present
considerable burdens to a manufacturer
and use of that AEDM can reasonably
predict the equipment’s energy
efficiency performance. Although
specific requirements vary by product or
equipment, use of an AEDM entails
development of a mathematical model
that estimates energy efficiency or
energy consumption characteristics of
the basic model, as would be measured
by the applicable DOE test procedure.
The AEDM must be based on
engineering or statistical analysis,
computer simulation or modeling, or
other analytic evaluation of performance
data. A manufacturer must validate an
AEDM by demonstrating that its
predicted efficiency performance of the
evaluated equipment agrees with the
performance as measured by actual
testing in accordance with the
applicable DOE test procedure. The
validation procedure and requirements,
including the statistical tolerance,
number of basic models, and number of
units tested vary by product.
Once developed, an AEDM may be
used to represent the performance of
untested basic models in lieu of
physical testing. Use of an AEDM for
any basic model is optional. One
potential advantage of an AEDM is that
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17963
it may free a manufacturer from the
burden of physical testing—but this
advantage must be weighed against the
potential risk that an AEDM may not
perfectly predict performance and could
result in a finding that the equipment
has an invalid rating and/or that the
manufacturer has distributed a
noncompliant basic model. The
manufacturer, by using an AEDM, bears
the responsibility and risk of the
validity of the ratings, including cases
where the manufacturer receives and
relies on performance data for certain
components from a component
manufacturer.
Given stakeholder requests for the
calculation methods to be more
representative, and to balance the risk of
allowing overrating through calculation
methods, DOE proposed allowing
manufacturers to use AEDMs to
determine performance ratings for
pumps in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
21268, 21304. DOE requested feedback
regarding all aspects of its proposal to
permit use of an AEDM for pumps. 87
FR 21268, 21305. DOE specifically
sought comment on its proposed
validation classes, and whether
groupings should be considered where
performance variation between two
equipment classes or nominal speeds is
well established. Id. In addition, DOE
requested comment on whether the
calculation-based methods would still
be necessary if manufacturers were
permitted to use AEDMs in addition to
physical testing. Id.
In the NOPR public meeting, ebmpabst asked if it is possible to keep
AEDM information proprietary between
the manufacturer and DOE or if it would
be public knowledge. (ebm-pabst, Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 35 at p. 41)
DOE notes that AEDM information
provided to DOE is not publicly
available.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR,
HI and Grundfos supported the use of
AEDMs. (HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 9) However, HI and
Grundfos encouraged DOE to maintain
the current calculation option since they
believe it is less burdensome than an
AEDM. Id. HI and Grundfos further
stated that DOE should consider
removing the calculation methods only
when AEDMs are being used by all
manufacturers for all reporting. Id.
Additionally, HI and Grundfos
expressed general agreement with the
proposed validation classes. Id.
The Efficiency Advocates commented
that the calculation-based approach in
the DOE test method and AEDMs
proposed by DOE can be used in lieu of
physical testing to help mitigate the
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17964
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
burden of testing the larger pumps.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 3)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting
provisions in 10 CFR 429.59(i) that
allow the use of AEDMs for pumps as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
Additionally, DOE is maintaining the
calculation methods in the test
procedure.
3. Enforcement Provisions
Enforcement provisions govern the
process DOE would follow when
performing an assessment of basic
model compliance with standards, as
described under subpart C of part 429.
Specifically, subpart C of part 429
describes the notification requirements,
legal processes, penalties, specific
prohibited acts, and testing protocols
related to testing covered equipment to
determine or verify compliance with
standards.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to apply the same general
enforcement provisions contained in
subpart C of part 429 to the proposed
expanded scope of pumps. 87 FR 21268,
21305. Additionally, DOE proposed in
the product-specific enforcement
provisions in 10 CFR 429.134(i) that
DOE will test each pump unit according
to the test method specified by the
manufacturer, and if the model of pump
unit was rated using an AEDM, DOE
may conduct enforcement testing using
either a testing approach or calculation
approach. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its enforcement
provision proposals. 87 FR 21268,
21305. In response, Grundfos agreed
with the proposal but stated that DOE
needs to clearly state that enforcement
for AEDM reported products will apply
the AEDM tolerances. (Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 9) Similarly, HI agreed with the
standard enforcement requirements in
10 CFR 429, subpart C for expanded
scope pumps but suggested the
following modification to clause ii: DOE
will test each pump unit according to
the test method specified by the
manufacturer in the certification report
submitted pursuant to § 429.59(b); if the
model or pump unit was rated using an
AEDM, DOE may use either a testing
approach or calculation approach using
the basic model tolerances found at
429.70(i)(2)(ii). (HI, No. 33 at p. 9)
In response to the comments from HI
and Grundfos, DOE notes that an AEDM
is a mathematical model that a
manufacturer develops to accurately
represent the tested performance of a
specific pump validation class. To
validate an AEDM, the manufacturer
must test at least two basic models
within a given validation class (see 10
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
CFR 429.70(j)(2)(i)). If the PEI calculated
by the AEDM is no more than five
percent less than the tested PEI, the
AEDM has been validated (see 10 CFR
429.70(j)(2)((ii)). If the PEI calculated by
the AEDM is more than five percent less
than the tested PEI, the AEDM is not
validated and will need to be revised
and compared to tested results until it
is not more than five percent less than
the tested PEI. For example, if tested PEI
is equal to 1.0 and AEDM results are
0.97, the AEDM would be considered
valid; however, if tested PEI is equal to
1.0 and AEDM results are 0.94, the
AEDM is not valid. When certifying
basic models through testing, DOE
specifies the determination of
represented value in 10 CFR 429.59(a).
When determining representations for
basic models using an AEDM, it is the
manufacturer’s responsibility to ensure
that the represented value is consistent
with the requirements in 10 CFR
429.59(a).
The previous paragraph addresses
manufacturer responsibilities,
specifically validation of an AEDM and
represented values. DOE is also
adopting provisions at 10 CFR
429.70(j)(5) to describe how DOE may
conduct testing on individual pump
models to verify basic model
compliance with an energy
consumption standard. DOE emphasizes
that this compliance enforcement is
separate and distinct from manufacturer
certification requirements. 10 CFR
429.7(j)(5)(v) specifies that the result of
a DOE verification test must be less than
or equal to the certified rating
multiplied by (1 + the applicable
tolerance), where the applicable
tolerance is 5 percent (see Table 4 to
paragraph (j)(5)(vi)). Therefore, if results
of an individual model tested by DOE
are greater than 1.05 percent of a
manufacturer’s certified rating (i.e., the
value the manufacturer certifies to
DOE), this model’s certified rating
would be invalid, and DOE would
pursue the actions listed in 10 CR
429.70(j)(v). For example, if a
manufacturer were to certify a pump
basic model with a PEI equal to 0.94 and
DOE testing yields a PEI of 0.97, DOE
would consider the model to meet its
certified rating, since 0.97 is less than
1.05 percent of the certified PEI value of
0.94 (1.05 multiplied by 0.94 is 0.987).
However, if DOE testing were to yield a
PEI of 0.99, DOE would consider the
model’s certified rating to be invalid.
In sum, DOE is adopting the five
percent tolerance for both AEDM
validation and AEDM verification
testing. DOE is also adopting productspecific enforcement provisions at 10
CFR 429.134 to specify that DOE will
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
test each pump unit according to the
test method specified by the
manufacturer, and for pumps rated
using an AEDM, DOE may conduct
enforcement testing using either a
testing approach or calculation
approach.
4. Basic Model Definition
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR,
pump manufacturers may elect to group
similar individual pump models within
the same equipment class into the same
basic model to reduce testing burden,
provided all representations regarding
the energy use of pumps within that
basic model are identical and based on
the most consumptive unit. 87 FR
21268, 21305. Accordingly,
manufacturers may pair a given bare
pump with several different motors (or
motor and controls) and can include all
combinations under the same basic
model if the certification of energy use
and all representations made by the
manufacturer are based on the most
consumptive bare pump/motor (or
motor and controls) combination for
each basic model and all individual
models are in the same equipment class.
86 FR 20075, 20083–20084.
In the case of pumps, ‘‘basic model’’
means all units of a given class of pump
manufactured by one manufacturer,
having the same primary energy source,
and having essentially identical
electrical, physical, and functional (or
hydraulic) characteristics that affect
energy consumption, energy efficiency,
water consumption, or water efficiency;
and, in addition, for pumps that are
subject to the standards specified in
§ 431.465(b), the following provisions in
§ 431.462 apply:
(1) All variations in numbers of stages of
bare RSV and ST pumps must be considered
a single basic model;
(2) Pump models for which the bare pump
differs in impeller diameter, or impeller trim,
may be considered a single basic model; and
(3) Pump models for which the bare pump
differs in number of stages or impeller
diameter, and which are sold with motors (or
motors and controls) of varying horsepower
may only be considered a single basic model
if:
(i) For ESCC, ESFM, IL, and RSV pumps,
each motor offered in the basic model has a
nominal full load motor efficiency rated at
the Federal minimum (see the current table
for NEMA Design B motors at § 431.25) or the
same number of bands above the Federal
minimum for each respective motor
horsepower (see Table 3 of appendix A); or
(ii) For ST pumps, each motor offered in
the basic model has a full load motor
efficiency at the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency shown in Table
2 of appendix A to or the same number of
bands above the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency for each
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
respective motor horsepower (see Table 3 of
appendix A).
10 CFR 431.462.
Clauses (1) and (2) of the basic model
definition, which are applicable to
pumps that are subject to the standards
specified in 10 CFR 431.465(b), align the
scope of the ‘‘basic model’’ definition
for pumps with the requirements that
testing be conducted at a certain number
of stages for RSV and ST pumps and at
full impeller diameter. 10 CFR 431.462.
Clause (3) of the definition, applicable
to pumps that are subject to the
standards specified in 10 CFR
431.465(b), addresses basic models
inclusive of pump models for which the
bare pump differs in number of stages
or impeller diameter. Id. Specifically,
variation in motor sizing (i.e., variation
in the horsepower rating of the paired
motor as a result of different impeller
trims or stages within a basic model) is
not a basis for requiring units to be rated
as unique basic models. However,
variation in motor sizing may also be
associated with variation in motor
efficiency, which is a performance
characteristic; typically, larger motors
are more efficient than smaller motors.
86 FR 20075, 20084.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that for motors not currently subject to
the DOE test procedure for electric
motors, it is not clear how
manufacturers would determine the
full-load efficiency of a given motor, or
specifically, determine the number of
bands above the Federal minimum or,
for submersible pumps, above the
default efficiency. 87 FR 21268, 21306–
21307. For inverter-only motors, DOE
noted that the IEC recently published an
industry test procedure that provides
test methods for measuring the
efficiency of these motors: IEC 60034–2–
3:2020, ‘‘Rotating electrical machines—
Part 2–3: Specific test methods for
determining losses and efficiency of
converter-fed AC motors’’ (‘‘IEC 60034’’)
and IEC 61800–9–2:2017. Id.
DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR that PERSTD for inverter-only
motors would still be based on DOE’s
standards for NEMA Design B motors.
87 FR 21268, 21307. Additionally, DOE
proposed to amend clause (3) for
inverter-only motors so that the current
band rule does not apply, and instead
the grouping can be based on anything
above the Federal minimum for NEMA
Design B motors as long as the rating is
based on the lowest number of bands
above the minimum. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, following
consideration of stakeholder’s
comments, DOE did not propose to
allow the grouping of single-phase and
polyphase products into a single basic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
model. 87 FR 21268, 21307. Instead,
DOE proposed to require that pumps
sold with single-phase motors can
continue to be rated as bare pumps
(with the exception of SVIL as discussed
in section III.G). Id.
DOE requested comment on its
proposed amendments to the definition
of the basic model in the April 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21307. In response,
HI and Grundfos stated that they agreed
with the proposed amendments to the
basic model but recommended adding
the models in the proposed scope
expansion to the basic model definition
if/when the expanded scope pumps are
added. (HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 9)
Grundfos disagreed with DOE’s
interpretation of how horsepower affects
multi-stage pump basic models.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 11) This
comment is discussed in detail in
section III.A.4.d as it pertains to the
scope of this test procedure.
Additionally, Grundfos recommended
DOE change clause (3) of the basic
model definition. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 5) Grundfos commented that it finds
certain applications of bowl assemblies
could lead to a product where both
impeller trim and motor size vary. Id.
Grundfos recommended that DOE
change clause (3) to read: ‘‘Pump
models for which the bare pump differs
in number of stages and/or impeller
diameter . . .’’ Id. The current clause
only includes ‘‘or,’’ which would imply
the only allowance is either in the
number of stages or impeller trim when
it could be both. Id. DOE agrees with the
clarification Grundfos offers and is
revising the definition for basic model
as Grundfos recommends.
DOE will address expanded scope
pumps in the basic model definition in
any future rulemaking related to the
certification of these pumps.
J. Representations of Energy Use and
Energy Efficiency
DOE understands manufacturers often
make representations (graphically or in
numerical form) of energy use metrics,
including pump efficiency, overall
(wire-to-water) efficiency, bowl
efficiency, driver power input, pump
power input (brake or shaft
horsepower), and/or pump power
output (hydraulic horsepower).
Manufacturers often make these
representations at multiple impeller
trims, operating speeds, and number of
stages for a given pump. In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to allow
manufacturers to continue making these
representations to ensure consistent and
standardized representations across the
pump industry. 87 FR 21268, 21308. To
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17965
ensure such representations are not in
conflict with the reported PEI for any
given pump model, DOE proposed to
establish optional testing procedures for
these parameters that are part of the
DOE test procedure. Id. DOE also
proposed that, to the extent
manufacturers wish to make
representations regarding the
performance of pumps using these
additional metrics, they would be
required to do so based on testing in
accordance with the DOE test
procedure. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its proposal to
adopt optional test provisions for the
measurement of overall (wire-to-water)
efficiency, driver power input, and/or
pump power output (hydraulic
horsepower). 87 FR 21268, 21308.
Grundfos commented that it has
concerns with these proposed revisions
since the testing is conducted only
against a basic model and does not
cover the full performance range for all
possible individual models that a basic
model represents. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 9) HI agreed that representations
should be consistent, but also suggested
that DOE allow pump manufacturers to
represent data over the full performance
range, including trims of the impeller
and cases where the maximum or
minimum speed range is outside the
rated nominal speed range (i.e., a pump
within scope but with an operating
speed range that goes above 4,320 rpm).
(HI, No. 33 at p. 9)
DOE also requested comment on its
understanding that HI 40.6–2021
contains all the necessary methods to
determine overall (wire-to-water)
efficiency, driver power input, and/or
pump power output (hydraulic
horsepower) and that further
specification is not necessary. HI and
Grundfos agreed that HI 40.6–2021
provides all the necessary methods. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
9)
After further review and
consideration of stakeholder comments,
DOE has determined that any
requirements for additional
representations of pump energy use and
energy efficiency will not be addressed
in the current rulemaking. Specifically,
in order to meet its stated goal of
ensuring representations of metrics
other than PEI are not in conflict with
the reported PEI for any given pump
model, it would only be necessary to
finalize provision related to metrics
used in the determination of PEI, which
would include driver input power at
load points used in the determination of
PEI. However, given that these metrics
are a component of PEI, they must
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17966
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
already be determined in accordance
with the DOE test procedure including
relevant provisions of HI 40.6–2021. For
these reasons, DOE is not finalizing its
proposal with respect to optional
representations.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
K. Test Procedure Costs and
Harmonization
EPCA requires that test procedures
proposed by DOE not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(2)) The following sections
discuss DOE’s evaluation of estimated
costs and savings associated with the
final amendments.
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to amend the existing test
procedure at appendix A for pumps by:
(1) expanding the scope to include SVIL
pumps; (2) expanding the scope to
include other specified clean water
pumps; (3) reducing the pump bowl
diameter restriction to include more ST
pumps; (4) changing the definitions of
ESFM and ESCC pumps to cover all
end-suction pumps; (5) incorporating a
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm, in addition
to 1,800 rpm and 3,600 rpm; (6)
providing a calculation method for
pumps sold with inverter-only motors;
and (7) updating the part-load loss
coefficients for pumps sold with
induction motors. 87 FR 21268, 21309.
DOE has determined that the test
procedure finalized in this notice will
not be unduly burdensome for
manufacturers to conduct. Further
discussion of the cost impacts of the test
procedure amendments are presented in
the following paragraphs.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on whether pump
manufacturers had to limit any pump
features due to the time and cost of
evaluating pumps performance
according to DOE’s current test
procedure, including, but not limited to,
the nature of the features that
manufacturers have had to forego
providing, the extent of the limits that
manufacturers have had to place, and
the manner in which manufacturers
have had to apply these limits—such as
on the basis of intended markets (e.g.,
higher-end vs. budget-end). 87 FR
21268, 21309. DOE also requested
information regarding how these
burdens may be mitigated to reduce the
likelihood of manufacturers having to
limit the inclusion of features with their
pumps. Id.
In response, Grundfos stated it has
limited modifications to and restricted
sales of certain equipment because of
the testing burden created by DOE’s
regulations. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
HI commented that manufacturers have
chosen to limit modifications to
equipment (i.e., new casting forms,
engineered-to-order product,
alternative/new VFD or motor
technology) because it poses a
substantial testing burden. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 9) HI asserted that these limitations
impact end users because they result in
pump manufacturers providing fewer
product offerings, and because testing
results in excessive lead times. Id.
DOE notes that pump manufacturers
must comply with the energy
conservation standards that were
established in 2016 and required
compliance beginning on January 27,
2020. 81 FR 4368 (January 26, 2016)
(‘‘January 2016 ECS Final Rule’’). Firsttime compliance costs associated with
meeting those energy conservation
standards included testing costs,
potential capital costs, and other onetime manufacturer costs associated with
developing a testing and certification
protocol. DOE also recognizes that the
current test procedure does not provide
a calculation method for pumps sold
with motors that do not have a DOE
energy efficiency standard; therefore, for
pumps that rely on such motors, wireto-water testing is required for each
basic model. Finally, DOE notes that for
all pumps currently subject to the
energy conservation standards, the
applicable energy efficiency values must
be determined for all basic models
according to the DOE test procedure,
which includes the calculation method
for certain pumps.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
estimated a per unit test cost of $1,600,
and estimated that 59 percent of the
models certified in DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database (‘‘CCD’’) were
certified using the calculation-based
approach. 87 FR 21268, 21309. DOE
estimated that it would take a
mechanical engineer two hours to
calculate and determine a rating for
each basic model. Id. Assuming a fully
burdened engineering hourly wage of
$66.16,36 DOE estimates the labor cost
of performing the pump calculation
method to be $132.31 per basic model.
36 DOE used the mean hourly wage of $46.64,
taken from BLS’s ‘‘Occupational Employment and
Wages, May 2021’’ using the Occupation Profile of
‘‘Mechanical Engineers’’ (17–2141). See:
www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes172141.htm. Last
accessed on October 11, 2022.
Additionally, DOE used data from the ‘‘Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation—June 2022’’ to
estimate that a Private Industry Worker’s wages and
salary are 70.5% of an employee’s total
compensation. See: www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/
ecec.pdf. Last accessed on October 11, 2022.
Therefore, total employer hourly cost is $66.16 =
$46.64 ÷ 0.705.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
These cost estimates apply to the
discussion in the following sections.
DOE has determined that the test
procedure amendments in this final rule
will impact testing costs as discussed in
the following sections.
a. Scope Expansion
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to expand the scope of this
test procedure to include SVIL pumps,
other specified clean water pumps, ST
pumps with bowl diameters greater than
6 inches, currently uncovered endsuction pumps, and pumps designed to
operate with a 6-pole induction motor
or with a non-induction motor with an
operating range that includes speeds of
rotation between 960 and 1,440 rpm. 87
FR 21268, 21273–21281. DOE also
assumed a sampling plan consistent
with that for pumps currently subject to
the test procedure, which requires a
sample size of at least two units per
pump basic model be tested when
determining representative values of
PEI, as well as other pump performance
metrics. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
Additionally, DOE assumed that
manufacturers would test pumps inhouse. 87 FR 21268, 21310. To test a
pump in-house, each manufacturer
might have to undertake the
construction and maintenance of a test
facility that is capable of testing pumps
in compliance with the test procedure,
including acquisition and calibration of
any necessary measurement equipment.
Id. DOE also assumed that
manufacturers have a pump test facility
available but may not have the
equipment required to conduct the DOE
test procedure and that the cost of
purchasing such equipment is
approximately $4,000 based on a review
of available testing equipment on the
market. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
assumed that pump manufacturers who
are member companies of HI or who
conduct testing in accordance with the
January 2016 Final Rule for other
product offerings already conduct
testing in accordance with HI 40.6–
2014, and would not incur any
additional capital expenditures to be
able to conduct the proposed DOE
pump test procedure. 87 FR 21268,
21310. Pump manufacturers who are not
members of HI may need to purchase
electrical measurement equipment with
plus or minus 2 percent accuracy to
conduct the pump test procedure. In the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE estimated that
calibrating the flowmeter, torque sensor,
power quality meter, pressure
transducer, and laser tachometer,
together, will cost a manufacturer about
$1,250 per year. Id.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
DOE requested comment on its
assumptions and understanding of the
anticipated impact and potential costs
to pump manufacturers if DOE expands
the scope of the pumps test procedure.
87 FR 21268, 21310. Additionally, DOE
requested comment on any potential
cost manufacturers may incur, if any,
from this NOPR’s proposed scope
expansion. Id.
In response, HI and Grundfos stated
that adding additional pump categories
to the test procedure scope will increase
burden on manufactures due to annual
recertification, surveillance, testing,
reporting, and documentation burden.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 10) HI also commented that larger
pumps with higher flow rates within the
proposed scope expansion may require
different testing infrastructure and
instrumentation with substantial capital
investment required. (HI, No. 33 at p.
10) Specifically, HI stated that BB1
pumps are considerably larger, and the
cost and burden associated with testing
BB pumps will be significantly higher.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 2) Grundfos stated
adding 6-pole product requires upgrades
to testing facilities and infrastructure
that will increase costs. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 10)
DOE acknowledges that larger pumps
may require additional investments in
testing facilities. However, since no test
cost data was provided by
manufacturers, DOE was unable to
adjust the test cost estimates for this
final rule. DOE notes that it is not
adopting the proposal to include ST and
VT pumps with bowl diameters larger
than 6 inches or BB pumps in the scope
of this test procedure. Therefore, the
burden associated with test facility
modifications is reduced compared to
the burden associated with the
proposals in the April 2022 NOPR.
b. Calculation Method for Testing
Pumps With Inverter-Only Motors
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed a calculation method for
testing pumps with inverter-only
motors. 87 FR 21268, 21310. The
current test procedure does not include
a calculation method for motors that do
not have a DOE efficiency standard;
therefore, manufacturers are required to
conduct wire-to-water testing for pumps
sold with these (i.e., inverter) motors.
Aside from the proposed calculation
approach, the test procedure, metrics,
and sampling plan for pumps remain
consistent with the requirements
established in the January 2016 Final
Rule and, among other things, require a
sample size of at least two units per
pump basic model be tested when
determining representative values of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PEI, as well as other pump performance
metrics.
For pumps already certified, DOE
would not expect any additional costs to
manufacturers. DOE has determined
that the calculation method for inverteronly motors proposed in the April 2022
NOPR would provide results that are
conservative when compared to results
from wire-to-water testing, which is still
an option in the test procedure.
Consequently, DOE does not expect
manufacturers will need to rerate their
basic models. For new basic models
where the bare pump is already certified
(i.e., the only change is in the inverteronly motor sold with the pump), DOE
expects manufacturer cost to be the
labor required to run the calculations
(i.e., $132.32 per basic model),
providing an estimated savings of
$3,070 per basic model (i.e., test cost
savings).37 DOE expects that there
would be no change in test cost for new
bare pump basic models paired with an
inverter-only motor, since the bare
pump would still need to be tested.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its assumptions
and understanding of the anticipated
impact and potential cost savings to
manufacturers of pumps sold with
inverter-only motors if DOE were to
adopt the proposed calculation method.
87 FR 21268, 21310. Additionally, DOE
requested comment on any potential
costs or savings that manufacturers may
incur, if any, from this proposal. Id.
In response, Grundfos and HI agreed
that there will be reduced testing
burden and cost savings. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) HI
additionally estimated that the
reduction of testing burden associated
with consolidation can range from 2 to
8 basic models. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10) HI
also recommended that DOE consider
other actions to reduce test cost such as
sample pumps, management of basic
models, other indirect labor, etc. Id.
DOE has concluded that the adopted
calculation method for inverter-only
motors will significantly reduce test
burden. DOE may consider the
additional actions to reduce test cost
recommended by HI in a future test
procedure rulemaking.
c. Updated Calculation Method for
Testing Pumps With Induction Motors
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed an updated calculation
method for testing pumps with
induction motors. 87 FR 21268, 21310.
37 As
previously stated, DOE estimated that the
per unit test cost is $1,600 and at least two units
need to be tested. Therefore, the calculation method
is estimated to save approximately $3,070 = ($1,600
× 2)¥$132.32.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17967
The updated calculation method
provides less conservative part-load loss
coefficients than those provided in the
current test procedure; however, DOE
tentatively determined that the
coefficients would still be conservative
relative to wire-to-water testing. Id.
Aside from the updated part-load motor
coefficients, the test procedure, metrics,
and sampling plan for pumps remains
consistent with the requirements
established in the January 2016 Final
Rule and, among other things, requires
that a sample size of at least two units
per pump basic model be tested when
determining representative values of
PEI, as well as other pump performance
metrics. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also
explained that, for pumps already
certified, DOE does not expect any
additional costs to manufacturers since
the current calculation method provides
the most conservative results. 87 FR
21268, 21310. DOE expects that there
will be no change in test cost for new
bare pump basic models paired with an
induction motor, since the bare pump
will need to be tested. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its assumptions
and understanding that there will be no
cost impact to manufacturers if DOE
adopts the proposed updated
coefficients for part-load motor losses.
87 FR 21268, 21310. Additionally, DOE
requested comment on any potential
costs or savings that manufacturers may
incur, if any, from this proposal. Id.
HI and Grundfos responded that there
would be some cost to update
procedures and calculators to reflect the
revised method. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10;
Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) Specifically,
Grundfos expected no manufacturer cost
savings associated with this change.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) HI said that
because the revised method can provide
a better PEI, manufacturers who want to
improve their PEI representation will
have costs associated with updating
representations in marketing,
nameplates, and certification of data.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 10)
DOE notes that it is primarily
concerned with increased test costs
associated with a test procedure
revision that would require
manufacturers to retest and recertify
their basic models. In this case, DOE
understands that manufacturers would
be voluntarily recertifying certain basic
models for marketing purposes only.
d. Additional Amendments
DOE does not anticipate that the
remaining amendments, proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR and as follows, would
impact test costs.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17968
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
(1) Incorporate by reference HI 40.6–
2021 into 10 CFR 431.463;
(2) Remove the incorporations by
reference of ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014;
In the April 2022 NOPR DOE
tentatively determined that
manufacturers would be able to rely on
data generated under the current test
procedure and would not have to retest
for reporting, certification or labeling
purposes. 87 FR 21268, 21310. DOE
maintains that determination in this
final rule.
2. Harmonization With Industry
Standards
DOE’s established practice is to adopt
relevant industry standards as DOE test
procedures unless such methodology
would be unduly burdensome to
conduct or would not produce test
results that reflect the energy efficiency,
energy use, water use (as specified in
EPCA) or estimated operating costs of
that product during a representative
average use cycle or period of use. See
10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A,
section 8(c). In cases where the industry
standard does not meet EPCA’s statutory
criteria for test procedures, DOE will
make modifications through the
rulemaking process to these testing
standards as needed to adopt the
procedure as the DOE test procedure.
The current test procedure for pumps
at subpart Y to part 431 incorporates by
reference ANSI/HI 40.6–2014 for
rotodynamic pump efficiency testing
and ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and ANSI/HI
2.1–2.2–2014 that includes pumps
nomenclature and definitions. As
discussed, the amendments finalized in
this rule update the DOE test procedure
to reference the most recent version of
HI 40.6–2021. DOE is removing its
reference ANSI/HI 1.1–1.2–2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1–2.2–2014 since these
industry standards have been replaced
by ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019, which is in
turn referenced by HI 40.6–2021. The
industry standards that DOE is
incorporating by reference in this
document are summarized in section
IV.N of this document.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the benefits and
burdens of the proposed updates and
additions to industry standards
referenced in the test procedure for
pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21311. While DOE
received no specific comments on the
burdens associated with its proposal,
both HI and Grundfos recommended
that DOE incorporate ANSI/HI 14.1–
14.2 instead of recreating definitions for
regulatory clarity. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10;
Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) Grundfos also
recommended that DOE create its own
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
terms when deviating from industry
terms. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10)
As discussed in section III.B.2, DOE
notes that its definitional language must
be clear and consistent on its own
without references to industry
standards. Therefore, DOE is not
referencing ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 in
its definitions.
L. Compliance Date
The effective date for the adopted test
procedure amendment will be 30 days
after publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. EPCA prescribes that
all representations of energy efficiency
and energy use, including those made
on marketing materials and product
labels, must be made in accordance with
an amended test procedure, beginning
180 days after publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)(1)) EPCA provides an allowance
for individual manufacturers to petition
DOE for an extension of the 180-day
period if the manufacturer may
experience undue hardship in meeting
the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2) To
receive such an extension, petitions
must be filed with DOE no later than 60
days before the end of the 180-day
period and must detail how the
manufacturer will experience undue
hardship. Id.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders
12866 and 13563
Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ as
supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O.
13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21,
2011), requires agencies, to the extent
permitted by law, to (1) propose or
adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that its benefits justify its
costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify); (2)
tailor regulations to impose the least
burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives, taking
into account, among other things, and to
the extent practicable, the costs of
cumulative regulations; (3) select, in
choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and
equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than
specifying the behavior or manner of
compliance that regulated entities must
adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees or
marketable permits, or providing
information upon which choices can be
made by the public. DOE emphasizes as
well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to
use the best available techniques to
quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(‘‘OIRA’’) in the Office of Management
and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) has emphasized
that such techniques may include
identifying changing future compliance
costs that might result from
technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes. For the reasons
stated in this preamble, this final
regulatory action is consistent with
these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also
requires agencies to submit ‘‘significant
regulatory actions’’ to OIRA for review.
OIRA has determined that this final
regulatory action does not constitute a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly,
this action was not submitted to OIRA
for review under E.O. 12866.
B. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation
of a final regulatory flexibility analysis
(‘‘FRFA’’) for any final rule where the
agency was first required by law to
publish a proposed rule for public
comment, unless the agency certifies
that the rule, if promulgated, will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
As required by Executive Order 13272,
‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities
in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461
(August 16, 2002), DOE published
procedures and policies on February 19,
2003, to ensure that the potential
impacts of its rules on small entities are
properly considered during the DOE
rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE
has made its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General
Counsel’s website: www.energy.gov/gc/
office-general-counsel. DOE reviewed
this final rule under the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the
procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. DOE has concluded
that this rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for this
certification is set forth below.
DOE has recently conducted a focused
inquiry into small business
manufacturers of the equipment covered
by this rulemaking. DOE used the Small
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Business Administration’s (‘‘SBA’’)
small business size standards to
determine whether any small entities
would be subject to the requirements of
the rule. The size standards are listed by
North American Industry Classification
System (‘‘NAICS’’) code as well as by
industry description and are available at
www.sba.gov/document/support--tablesize-standards. Manufacturing
commercial and industrial pumps is
classified under NAICS 333914,
‘‘measuring, dispensing, and other
pumping equipment manufacturing.’’
The SBA sets a threshold of 750
employees or fewer for an entity to be
considered as a small business for this
category. DOE used available public
information to identify potential small
manufacturers. DOE accessed the
Compliance Certification Database 38 to
create a list of companies that import or
otherwise manufacture the equipment
covered by this rulemaking . Once DOE
created a list of potential manufacturers,
DOE used market research tools to
determine whether any met the SBA’s
definition of a small entity, based on the
total number of employees for each
company including parent, subsidiary,
and sister entities.
Based on DOE’s analysis, 46
companies potentially selling
commercial and industrial pumps
covered by this test procedure were
identified. DOE screened out companies
that do not meet the small entity
definition, and additionally screened
out companies that are largely or
entirely foreign-owned and operated. Of
the 46 companies, 21 were therefore
further identified as a small business.
Based on a review of publicly available
model databases, DOE estimated the
number of models currently covered by
the test procedure for each small
business, excluding four small
businesses not reflected in the model
databases. DOE attributes a total of 779
unique basic models of covered pumps
to small businesses, ranging from one
model to 503 models for an average of
approximately 46 models per small
business. DOE was able to find revenue
estimates for all 21 small businesses.
DOE estimates that this test procedure
would not require any manufacturer to
incur any additional testing burden
associated with the test procedure. If
finalized, DOE recognizes that
commercial and industrial pump energy
conservation standards may be
proposed or promulgated in the future
and pump manufacturers would then be
required to test all covered pumps in
38 U.S. Department of Energy Compliance
Certification Database, available at:
www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
accordance with the test procedures.
(See Docket No. EERE–2020–BT–STD–
0013). Therefore, although such testing
is not yet required, DOE is presenting
the costs associated with testing
equipment and procedure consistent
with the requirements of the test
procedure, as would be required to
comply with any future energy
conservation standards for pumps.
Additionally, since the list of small
businesses was drawn from
manufacturers with products covered by
the previous test procedure, DOE
assumes that each noted small business
already possesses the necessary
equipment for testing under the test
procedure. Impacts for each test
procedure amendment are reviewed
below:
SVIL Product Class Scope Expansion
DOE examined the websites and,
when available, product catalogs of all
previously identified 20 potential small
businesses for listings of SVIL pumps.
DOE identified two small businesses
manufacturing SVIL pumps—producing
an estimated total of 65 basic models,
with one small business producing nine
basic models and another producing as
many as 56 basic models. DOE
estimated that it would cost
approximately $1,600 per unit tested—
a sample of two units being required per
basic model. Accordingly, all small
businesses combined would incur costs
of approximately $208,000—with the
first small business incurring a cost of
$28,800 and the second incurring a cost
of $179,200. However, such testing
would only be required upon the
compliance date of any future energy
conservation standard for SVIL pumps.
DOE was able to find revenue
estimates for both small businesses.
Testing costs for newly covered SVIL
pumps represent significantly less than
one percent of estimated annual revenue
for one of the small businesses and
would constitute as much as ten percent
of estimated annual revenue for the
small business producing 56 models.
Other Clean Water Pump Scope
Expansion
DOE examined the websites and,
when available, the product catalogs of
all previously identified 21 potential
small businesses for listings of any of
the clean water pumps that are newly
covered under this test procedure. DOE
identified four small businesses
manufacturing clean water pumps
covered by this rulemaking that are not
covered by the current test procedure.
One of these manufacturers also
produce SVIL pumps. Although a newly
covered model count estimate was not
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17969
possible for two small businesses, the
remaining two small businesses produce
an estimated total of 37 newly covered
basic models, the first producing 15
basic models and the second producing
22 newly covered basic models. The
first small business produces
approximately 15 models that would
fall under the 1,200 rpm scope
expansion. With the second small
business, approximately one-third of
newly covered unique basic models are
submersible pumps and two-thirds are
vertical turbine pumps, several of which
also fall under the 1,200 rpm scope
expansion. DOE estimated that it would
cost approximately $1,600 per unit
tested—a sample of two being required
per unique basic model. Accordingly,
the small businesses combined would
incur costs of approximately $118,400—
with the first incurring a cost of
$48,000and the second incurring a cost
of $70,400. The first small business
produces both SVIL pumps and newly
covered clean water pumps and would
incur an approximate total testing cost
of $76,800.
DOE was able to find revenue
estimates for both small businesses.
Testing costs for newly covered clean
water pumps represent significantly less
than one percent of estimated annual
revenue for both small businesses.
However, such testing would only be
required upon the compliance date of
any future energy conservation standard
for SVIL pumps.
Calculation Method Changes
Relative to the current test procedure
calculation methodology, the
calculation changes are conservative;
therefore, manufacturers would not
have to recalculate or re-rate existing
models. Accordingly, DOE does not
anticipate that updating the part-load
loss coefficients for pumps sold with
induction motors or providing a
calculation method for pumps sold with
inverter-only motors would impose any
costs on small businesses when the test
procedure is in force. Likewise,
permitting the use of AEDMs in lieu of
the calculation-based test is not
expected to result in additional costs for
affected small businesses, as they will
continue to be able to employ the
calculation-based test.
Conclusion
DOE identified a total of five small
business OEMs affected by this final
rule. The affected small businesses
represent approximately 25 percent of
all identified small business OEMs
producing pumps covered under this
rulemaking. DOE believes this to be a
substantial number of affected small
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17970
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
entities in the context of the pumps
industry. However, as noted previously,
the presented costs would not be
incurred as a result of this test
procedure taking effect and are, with
one exception, estimated to constitute
less than one percent of the affected
small businesses’ revenue if DOE
establishes energy conservation
standards for pumps not currently
subject to DOE’s energy conservation
standards.
Based on the de minimis cost impacts,
DOE certifies that this final rule does
not have a ‘‘significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities,’’ and determined that the
preparation of a FRFA is not warranted.
DOE will transmit a certification and
supporting statement of factual basis to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of pumps must certify
to DOE that their products comply with
any applicable energy conservation
standards. To certify compliance,
manufacturers must first obtain test data
for their products according to the DOE
test procedures, including any
amendments adopted for those test
procedures. DOE has established
regulations for the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for all
covered consumer products and
commercial equipment, including
pumps. (See generally 10 CFR part 429.)
The collection-of-information
requirement for the certification and
recordkeeping is subject to review and
approval by OMB under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement
has been approved by OMB under OMB
control number 1910–1400. Public
reporting burden for the certification is
estimated to average 35 hours per
response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information.
DOE is not amending the certification
or reporting requirements for pumps in
this final rule. Instead, DOE may
consider proposals to amend the
certification requirements and reporting
for pumps under a separate rulemaking
regarding appliance and equipment
certification. DOE will address changes
to OMB Control Number 1910–1400 at
that time, as necessary.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
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 establishes test
procedure amendments that it expects
will be used to develop and implement
future energy conservation standards for
pumps. 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, DOE has determined that
adopting test procedures for measuring
energy efficiency of consumer products
and industrial equipment is consistent
with activities identified in 10 CFR part
1021, appendix A to subpart D, A5 and
A6. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’
64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on agencies
formulating and implementing policies
or regulations that preempt State law or
that have federalism implications. The
Executive order requires agencies to
examine the constitutional and statutory
authority supporting any action that
would limit the policymaking discretion
of the States and to carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. The
Executive order also requires agencies to
have an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy
describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the
development of such regulations. 65 FR
13735. DOE 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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
12820; also available at
www.energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. 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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
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). Pursuant to OMB
Memorandum M–19–15, Improving
Implementation of the Information
Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE
published updated guidelines which are
available at www.energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2019/12/f70/
DOE%20Final%20Updated
%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec
%202019.pdf. DOE has reviewed this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
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 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
of energy, nor has it been designated as
a significant energy action by the
Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is
not a significant energy action, and,
accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department
of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95–
91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply
with section 32 of the Federal Energy
Administration Act of 1974, as amended
by the Federal Energy Administration
Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C.
788; ‘‘FEAA’’) Section 32 essentially
provides in relevant part that, where a
proposed rule authorizes or requires use
of commercial standards, the notice of
proposed rulemaking must inform the
public of the use and background of
such standards. In addition, section
32(c) requires DOE to consult with the
Attorney General and the Chairman of
the Federal Trade Commission (‘‘FTC’’)
concerning the impact of the
commercial or industry standards on
competition.
The modifications to the test
procedure for pumps adopted in this
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17971
final rule incorporates testing methods
contained in certain sections of the
following commercial standards: HI
40.6–2021, HI 9.6.1–2017, HI 9.6.6–
2016, HI 9.8–2018, HI 14.1–14.2–2019,
the HI Engineering Data Book, ANSI/
ASME MFC–5M–1985, ASME MFC–
3M–2004, ASME MFC–8M–2001, ASME
MFC–12M–2006, ASME MFC–16–2014,
ASME MFC–22–2007, AWWA E103–
2015, CSA C390–10, IEEE 112–2017,
IEEE 114–2010, ISO 1438:2017, ISO
2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167–
1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017,
and ISO 20456:2017. DOE has evaluated
these standards and is unable to
conclude whether it fully complies with
the requirements of section 32(b) of the
FEAA (i.e., whether it was developed in
a manner that fully provides for public
participation, comment, and review.)
DOE has consulted with both the
Attorney General and the Chairman of
the FTC about the impact on
competition of using the methods
contained in these standards 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 Materials Incorporated
by Reference
In this final rule, DOE incorporates by
reference the following standards:
(1) HI 40.6–2021. This standard establishes
testing protocols for testing of
rotodynamic pumps for determination of
pump efficiency in a uniform manner.
(2) ANSI/HI 9.6.1–2017. This standard,
referenced in HI 40.6–2021, applies to
rotodynamic pumps and defines
calculation of net positive suction head
(‘‘NPSH’’) margin and recommends
NPSH margin for these pumps based on
specific application considerations,
pump design, and the flow relative to the
BEP.
(3) ANSI/HI 9.6.6–2016. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and details
pump piping requirements for
rotodynamic pumps and effects of inlet/
outlet piping on pump performance.
(4) ANSI/HI 9.8–2018. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and
discusses appropriate design for various
pump intakes.
(5) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and covers
types, nomenclature, and definitions for
commercial and industrial pump types.
(6) HI Engineering Data Book—Second
Edition. This document is referenced in
HI 40.6–2021 and covers fluid
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
17972
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
requirements, and energy efficiency
levels for three-phase induction motors.
characteristics, fluid flow, and
characteristics of piping materials.
Copies of HI 40.6–2021, ANSI/HI
9.6.1–2017, ANSI/HI 9.6.6–2016, ANSI/
HI 9.8–2018, ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019,
and the HI Engineering Data Book—
Second Edition can be obtained from
the Hydraulics Institute, 300 Interpace
Parkway, Bldg. a 3rd floor, Parsippany,
NJ 07054, (973) 267–9700, or online at:
pumps.org.
(7) ANSI/ASME MFC–5M–1985. This
standard is referenced in HI 40.6–2021
and provides information on ultrasonic
flowmeters that operate on the
measurement of acoustic signal transit
times.
(8) ASME MFC–3M–2004. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and specifies
the geometry and method of use for
pressure differential devices (i.e., orifice,
nozzle, and venturi meters) for
measuring full-pipe liquid flow in a
closed conduit.
(9) ASME MFC–8M–2001. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and describes
a method for connecting pressure signal
transmissions between primary and
secondary devices.
(10) ASME MFC–12M–2006. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and provides
information on the use of multiport
averaging Pitot head-type devices used to
measure liquids and gases.
(11) ASME MFC–16–2014. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and provides
information on industrial
electromagnetic flowmeters and their
application in the measurement of liquid
flow.
(12) ASME MFC–22–2007. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and describes
the criteria for application of turbine
flowmeters with rotating blades for
measuring full-pipe liquid flow through
closed conduit.
Copies of ANSI/ASME MFC–5M–
1985, ASME MFC–3M–2004, and ASME
MFC–8M–2001, ASME MFC–12M–
2006, ASME MFC–16–2014, and ASME
MFC–22–2007, can be obtained from the
American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, Two Park Avenue, New
York, NY 10016–5990, (800) 843–2763,
or online at: asme.org.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
(13) AWWA E103–2015. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and provides
minimum requirements for horizontal
centrifugal pumps and for vertical lineshaft pumps for installation in wells,
water treatment plants, water
transmission systems, and water
distribution systems.
Copies of AWWA E103–2015 can be
obtained from the American Water
Works Association, 6666 W Quincy
Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (303) 794–
7711, or online at: awwa.org.
(14) CSA C390–10. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and
establishes test methods, marking
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
Copies of CSA C390–10 can be
obtained from the Canadian Standards
Association, 178 Rexdale Blvd.,
Toronto, ON, Canada M9W 1R3, (800)
463–6727, or online at csagroup.org.
(15) IEEE 112–2017. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and contains
instructions for conducting and reporting
the more generally applicable and
acceptable tests of polyphase induction
motors and generators.
(16) IEEE 114–2010. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and contains
instructions to determine the
performance characteristics of singlephase induction motors.
Copies of IEEE 112–2017 and IEEE
114–2010 can be obtained from the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway,
NJ 08854–4141, (732) 981–0060, or
online at standards.ieee.org.
(17) ISO 1438:2017. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and specifies
methods for the measurement of water
flow in open channels using rectangular
and triangular-notch (V-notch) thin-plate
weirs.
(18) ISO 2186:2007. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and specifies
provisions for the design, lay-out and
installation for transmitting pressure
signals from a primary to a secondary
device without signal distortion.
(19) ISO 2715:2017. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021, describes
and discusses the characteristics of
turbine flowmeters, and is applicable to
metering any appropriate liquid.
(20) ISO 3354:2008. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and specifies
a method for the determination of the
volume flow rate in a closed conduit.
(21) ISO 3966:2020. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and specifies
a method for determining volume
flowrate in a closed conduit using
propeller-type current-meters.
(22) ISO 5167–1:2003. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and
establishes methods of measuring and
calculating flowrate in a conduit using
pressure differential devices (i.e., orifice
plates, nozzles, and Venturi tubes).
(23) ISO 5198:1987. This standard is
referenced in HI 40.6–2021 and specifies
precision class tests (i.e., high accuracy)
for testing centrifugal, mixed flow, and
axial pumps.
(24) ISO 6416:2017. HI 40.6–2021 references
ISO/TR 12765 which is identical to this
standard, which describes the
establishment and operation of an
ultrasonic gauging station for the
continuous measurement of discharge in
a river, an open channel or a closed
conduit.
(25) ISO 20456:2017. HI 40.6–2021 references
ISO 9104:1991 which has since been
revised to ISO 20456:2017, which
cancels and replaces ISO 9104:1991. ISO
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
20456:2017 describes how industrial
electromagnetic flowmeters are used for
the measurement of flowrate of a
conductive liquid in a closed conduit
running full.
Copies of ISO 1438:2017, ISO
2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167–
1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017,
and ISO 20456:2017 can be obtained
from the International Organization for
Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet
8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva,
Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, or online
at: iso.org.
The following standards are already
approved for the sections where they
appear: CSA C747–2009, FM Class
Number 1319, HI 40.6–2014, HI 41.5–
2022, IEEE 113–1985, IEEE 114–2010,
NFPA 20–2016, NSF/ANSI 50–2015, UL
448, and UL 1081.
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
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Household appliances, Imports,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Small
businesses.
10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation test
procedures, Incorporation by reference,
and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on February 28,
2023, by Francisco Alejandro Moreno,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy,
pursuant to delegated authority from the
Secretary of Energy. That document
with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters
the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Signed in Washington, DC, on March 15,
2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and
430 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; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Amend § 429.59 by:
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory
text;
■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(2)(iv)
through (vii) as paragraphs (a)(2)(v)
through (viii); and
■ c. Adding new paragraph (a)(3).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 429.59
Pumps.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Determination of represented
value. Manufacturers must determine
the represented value, which includes
the certified rating, for each basic model
of general purpose pump either by
testing (which includes the calculationbased methods in the test procedure), in
conjunction with the following
sampling provisions, or by application
of an AEDM that meets the requirements
of § 429.70 and the provisions of this
section. Manufacturers must determine
the represented value, which includes
the certified rating, for each basic model
of dedicated-purpose pool pump by
testing, in conjunction with the
following sampling provisions.
Manufacturers must update represented
values to account for any change in the
applicable motor standards in subpart B
of part 431 of this chapter and certify
amended values as of the next annual
certification.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(iv) General pumps. The
representative values for pump total
head in feet at BEP and nominal speed,
volume per unit time in gallons per
minute at BEP and nominal speed, and
calculated driver power input at each
load point must be the arithmetic mean
of the value determined for each tested
unit of general pump.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Alternative efficiency
determination methods. In lieu of
testing, a represented value of efficiency
or consumption for a basic model of
pump must be determined through the
application of an AEDM pursuant to the
requirements of § 429.70 and the
provisions of this section, where:
(i) Any represented value of energy
consumption or other measure of energy
use of a basic model for which
consumers would favor lower values
shall be greater than or equal to the
output of the AEDM and less than or
equal to the Federal standard for that
basic model; and
(ii) Any represented value of energy
efficiency or other measure of energy
consumption of a basic model for which
consumers would favor higher values
shall be less than or equal to the output
of the AEDM and greater than or equal
to the Federal standard for that basic
model.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 429.70 by adding
paragraph (m) to read as follows:
§ 429.70 Alternative methods for
determining energy efficiency and energy
use.
*
*
*
*
*
(m) Alternative efficiency
determination method (AEDM) for
general pumps—(1) Criteria an AEDM
must satisfy. A manufacturer may not
apply an AEDM to a basic model to
determine its efficiency pursuant to this
section, unless:
(i) The AEDM is derived from a
mathematical model that estimates the
energy efficiency or energy
consumption characteristics of the basic
model as measured by the applicable
DOE test procedure;
(ii) The AEDM is based on
engineering or statistical analysis,
computer simulation or modeling, or
other analytic evaluation of performance
data; and
(iii) The manufacturer has validated
the AEDM, in accordance with
paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
(2) Validation of an AEDM. Before
using an AEDM, the manufacturer must
validate the AEDM’s accuracy and
reliability as follows:
(i) AEDM overview. The manufacturer
must select at least the minimum
number of basic models for each
validation class specified in paragraph
(m)(2)(iv) of this section to which the
particular AEDM applies. Using the
AEDM, calculate the PEI for each of the
selected basic models. Test each basic
model and determine the represented
value(s) in accordance with § 429.63(a).
Compare the results from the testing and
the AEDM output according to
paragraph (m)(2)(ii) of this section. The
manufacturer is responsible for ensuring
the accuracy and repeatability of the
AEDM.
(ii) AEDM basic model tolerances. (A)
The predicted representative PEI for
each basic model calculated by applying
the AEDM may not be more than five
percent less than the represented PEI
determined from the corresponding test
of the model.
(B) The predicted constant or variable
load pump energy index for each basic
model calculated by applying the AEDM
must meet or exceed the applicable
federal energy conservation standard.
(iii) Additional test unit requirements.
(A) Each AEDM must be supported by
test data obtained from physical tests of
current models; and
(B) Test results used to validate the
AEDM must meet or exceed current,
applicable Federal standards as
specified in part 431 of this chapter; and
(C) Each test must have been
performed in accordance with the
applicable DOE test procedure with
which compliance is required at the
time the basic models used for
validation are distributed in commerce.
(iv) Pump validation classes.
Minimum number of
distinct basic models
that must be tested
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Validation class
(A) Constant Load End-suction Closed-Coupled Pumps and Constant Load End-suction Frame-Mounted Pumps ............
(B) Variable Load End-suction Closed-Coupled Pumps and Variable Load End-suction Frame-Mounted Pumps ...............
(C) Constant Load Inline Pumps and Constant Load Small Vertical Inline Pumps ...............................................................
(D) Variable Load Inline Pumps and Variable Load Small Vertical Inline Pumps ..................................................................
(E) Constant Load Radially-Split Multi-Stage Vertical Pumps and Constant Load Radially-Split Multi-Stage Horizonal
Pumps.
(F) Variable Load Radially-Split Multi-Stage Vertical Pumps and Variable Load Radially-Split Multi-Stage Horizontal
Pumps.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
17973
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
2
2
2
2
2
Basic
Basic
Basic
Basic
Basic
Models.
Models.
Models.
Models.
Models.
2 Basic Models.
17974
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Minimum number of
distinct basic models
that must be tested
Validation class
(G) Constant Load Submersible Turbine Pumps and Constant Load Vertical Turbine Pumps .............................................
(H) Variable Load Submersible Turbine Pumps and Variable Load Vertical Turbine Pumps ................................................
(3) AEDM records retention
requirements. If a manufacturer has
used an AEDM to determine
representative values pursuant to this
section, the manufacturer must have
available upon request for inspection by
the Department records showing:
(i) The AEDM, including the
mathematical model, the engineering or
statistical analysis, and/or computer
simulation or modeling that is the basis
of the AEDM;
(ii) Regarding the units tested that
were used to validate the AEDM
pursuant to paragraph (m)(2) of this
section, equipment information,
complete test data, AEDM calculations,
and the statistical comparisons; and
(iii) For each basic model to which
the AEDM was applied, equipment
information and AEDM calculations.
(4) Additional AEDM requirements. If
requested by the Department, the
manufacturer must:
(i) Conduct simulations before
representatives of the Department to
predict the performance of particular
basic models of the equipment to which
the AEDM was applied;
(ii) Provide analyses of previous
simulations conducted by the
manufacturer; and/or
(iii) Conduct certification testing of
basic models selected by the
Department.
(5) AEDM verification testing. DOE
may use the test data for a given
individual model generated pursuant to
§ 429.104 to verify the certified rating
determined by an AEDM as long as the
following process is followed:
(i) Selection of units. DOE will obtain
units for test from retail, where
available. If units cannot be obtained
from retail, DOE will request that a unit
be provided by the manufacturer.
(ii) Lab requirements. DOE will
conduct testing at an independent,
third-party testing facility of its
choosing. In cases where no third-party
laboratory is capable of testing the
equipment, it may be tested at a
manufacturer’s facility upon DOE’s
request.
(iii) Manufacturer participation.
Testing will be performed without
manufacturer representatives on-site.
(iv) Testing. All verification testing
will be conducted in accordance with
the applicable DOE test procedure, as
well as each of the following to the
extent that they apply:
(A) Any active test procedure waivers
that have been granted for the basic
model;
2 Basic Models.
2 Basic Models.
(B) Any test procedure guidance that
has been issued by DOE;
(C) If during test set-up or testing, the
lab indicates to DOE that it needs
additional information regarding a given
basic model in order to test in
accordance with the applicable DOE test
procedure, DOE may organize a meeting
between DOE, the manufacturer and the
lab to provide such information.
(D) At no time during the process may
the lab communicate directly with the
manufacturer without DOE present.
(v) Failure to meet certified rating. If
a model’s test results are worse than its
certified rating by an amount exceeding
the tolerance prescribed in paragraph
(f)(5)(vi) of this section, DOE will notify
the manufacturer. DOE will provide the
manufacturer with all documentation
related to the test set up, test conditions,
and test results for the unit. Within the
timeframe allotted by DOE, the
manufacturer may then present all
claims regarding testing validity.
(vi) Tolerances. For consumption
metrics, the result from a DOE
verification test must be less than or
equal to the certified rating × (1 + the
applicable tolerance).
TABLE 7 TO PARAGRAPH (m)(5)(vi)
Equipment
Metric
Applicable
tolerance
(%)
General Pumps .........................................
Constant or Variable Load Pump Energy Index ..........................................................
5
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
(vii) Invalid rating. If, following
discussions with the manufacturer and
a retest where applicable, DOE
determines that the testing was
conducted appropriately in accordance
with the DOE test procedure, the rating
for the model will be considered
invalid. The manufacturer must conduct
additional testing and re-rate and recertify the basic models that were rated
using the AEDM based on all test data
collected, including DOE’s test data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
(viii) AEDM use. This paragraph
(m)(5)(viii) specifies when a
manufacturer’s use of an AEDM may be
restricted due to prior invalid
represented values.
(A) If DOE has determined that a
manufacturer made invalid ratings on
two or more models rated using the
same AEDM within a 24-month period,
the manufacturer must take the action
listed in the table corresponding to the
number of invalid certified ratings. The
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
twenty-four month period begins with a
DOE determination that a rating is
invalid through the process outlined
previously. Additional invalid ratings
apply for the purposes of determining
the appropriate consequences if the
subsequent determination(s) is based on
selection of a unit for testing within the
twenty-four-month period (i.e.,
subsequent determinations need not be
made within 24 months).
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
17975
TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (m)(5)(viii)(A)
Number of invalid certified ratings
from the same AEDM 1 within a
rolling 24-month period 2
2 ......................................................
4 ......................................................
6 ......................................................
> = 8 ................................................
Required manufacturer actions
Submit different test data and reports from testing to validate that AEDM within the validation classes to
which it is applied.3 Adjust the ratings as appropriate.
Conduct double the minimum number of validation tests for the validation classes to which the AEDM is
applied. Note, the tests required under this paragraph (m)(5)(viii) must be performed on different models
than the original tests required under paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
Conduct the minimum number of validation tests for the validation classes to which the AEDM is applied at
a third-party test facility; And
Conduct additional testing, which is equal to 1⁄2 the minimum number of validation tests for the validation
classes to which the AEDM is applied, at either the manufacturer’s facility or a third-party test facility, at
the manufacturer’s discretion.
Note, the tests required under this paragraph (m)(5)(viii) must be performed on different models than the
original tests performed under paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
Manufacturer has lost privilege to use AEDM. All ratings for models within the validation classes to which
the AEDM applied should be rated via testing. Distribution cannot continue until certification(s) are corrected to reflect actual test data.
1 The ‘‘same AEDM’’ means a computer simulation or mathematical model that is identified by the manufacturer at the time of certification as
having been used to rate a model or group of models.
2 The twenty-four month period begins with a DOE determination that a rating is invalid through the process outlined above. Additional invalid
ratings apply for the purposes of determining the appropriate consequences if the subsequent determination(s) is based on testing of a unit that
was selected for testing within the twenty-four month period (i.e., subsequent determinations need not be made within 24 months).
3 A manufacturer may discuss with DOE’s Office of Enforcement whether existing test data on different basic models within the validation
classes to which that specific AEDM was applied may be used to meet this requirement.
(B) If, as a result of eight or more
invalid ratings, a manufacturer has lost
the privilege of using an AEDM for
rating, the manufacturer may regain the
ability to use an AEDM by:
(1) Investigating and identifying
cause(s) for failures;
(2) Taking corrective action to address
cause(s);
(3) Performing six new tests per
validation class, a minimum of two of
which must be performed by an
independent, third-party laboratory to
validate the AEDM; and
(4) Obtaining DOE authorization to
resume use of the AEDM.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Section 429.134 is amended by
revising paragraph (i)(1)(ii):
§ 429.134 Product-specific enforcement
provisions.
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) DOE will test each pump unit
according to the test method specified
by the manufacturer in the certification
report submitted pursuant to
§ 429.59(b); if the model of pump unit
was rated using an AEDM, DOE may use
either a testing approach or calculation
approach.
*
*
*
*
*
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
*
PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
4. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
5. Amend § 431.462 by:
a. Revising the introductory text;
b. Revising the definition of ‘‘Basic
model’’;
■ c. Adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ‘‘Bowl’’;
■ d. Revising the definitions of ‘‘Bowl
diameter’’, ‘‘Close-coupled pump’’,
‘‘End suction close-coupled (ESCC)
pump’’, ‘‘End suction frame mounted/
own bearings (ESFM) pump’’, ‘‘End
suction pump’’, ‘‘In-line (IL) pump’’,
and ‘‘Mechanically-coupled pump’’;
■ e. Adding in alphabetical order
definitions for ‘‘Radially-split, multistage, horizontal, diffuser casing (RSH)
pump’’, ‘‘Radially-split, multi-stage,
horizontal, end-suction diffuser casing
(RSHES) pump’’, and ‘‘Radially-split,
multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser
casing (RSHIL) pump’’;
■ f. Revising the definition of ‘‘Radiallysplit, multi-stage, vertical, in-line
diffuser casing (RSV) pump’’;
■ g. Adding in alphabetical order
definitions for ‘‘Small vertical in-line
(SVIL) pump’’ and ‘‘Small vertical twinhead pump’’;
■ h. Revising the definition of
‘‘Submersible turbine (ST) pump’’; and
■ i. Adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ‘‘Vertical turbine pump’’.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
■
§ 431.462
Definitions.
The following definitions are
applicable to this subpart, including
appendices A, B, and C. In cases where
definitions reference design intent, DOE
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
will consider marketing materials, labels
and certifications, and equipment
design to determine design intent.
*
*
*
*
*
Basic model means all units of a given
class of pump manufactured by one
manufacturer, having the same primary
energy source, and having essentially
identical electrical, physical, and
functional (or hydraulic) characteristics
that affect energy consumption, energy
efficiency, water consumption, or water
efficiency; and, in addition, for pumps
that are subject to the test procedures
specified in § 431.464(a), the following
provisions also apply:
(1) All variations in numbers of stages
of bare RSV and ST pumps must be
considered a single basic model;
(2) Pump models for which the bare
pump differs in impeller diameter and/
or impeller trim, may be considered a
single basic model; and
(3) Pump models for which the bare
pump differs in number of stages and/
or impeller diameter and which are sold
with motors (or motors and controls) of
varying horsepower may only be
considered a single basic model if:
(i) For ESCC, ESFM, IL, and RSV
pumps, each motor offered in the basic
model has a nominal full load motor
efficiency rated at the Federal minimum
(see the applicable table at § 431.25) or
the same number of bands above the
Federal minimum for each respective
motor horsepower (see table 3 of
appendix A to this subpart); or for
pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, any
number of bands above the Federal
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
17976
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
minimum for each respective motor
horsepower provided that the rating is
based on the lowest number of bands; or
(ii) For ST pumps, each motor offered
in the basic model has a full load motor
efficiency at the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency
shown in table 2 of appendix A to
subpart Y of this part or the same
number of bands above the default
nominal full load submersible motor
efficiency for each respective motor
horsepower (see table 3 of appendix A
to this subpart) or for inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, any
number of bands above the default
nominal full load submersible motor
efficiency provided the rating is based
on the lowest number of bands.
*
*
*
*
*
Bowl means a casing in which the
impeller rotates, and that directs flow
axially to the next stage or the discharge
column.
Bowl diameter means the maximum
dimension of an imaginary straight line
passing through and in the plane of the
circular shape of the bowl of the bare
pump that is perpendicular to the pump
shaft and that intersects the outermost
circular shape of the bowl of the bare
pump at both of its ends.
*
*
*
*
*
Close-coupled pump means a pump
in which the driver’s bearings are
designed to absorb the pump’s axial
load.
*
*
*
*
*
End-suction close-coupled (ESCC)
pump means a close-coupled, dry rotor,
end-suction pump that has a shaft input
power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and
full impeller diameter and that is not a
dedicated-purpose pool pump.
End-suction frame mounted/own
bearings (ESFM) pump means a
mechanically-coupled, dry rotor, endsuction pump that has a shaft input
power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and
full impeller diameter and that is not a
dedicated-purpose pool pump.
End-suction pump means a singlestage, rotodynamic pump in which the
liquid enters the bare pump in a
direction parallel to the impeller shaft
and on the side opposite the bare
pump’s driver-end. The liquid is
discharged in a plane perpendicular to
the shaft.
*
*
*
*
*
In-line (IL) pump means a pump that
is either a twin head pump or a singlestage, single-axis flow, dry rotor,
rotodynamic pump that has a shaft
input power greater than or equal to 1
hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
BEP and full impeller diameter, in
which liquid is discharged in a plane
perpendicular to the shaft. Such pumps
do not include circulator pumps.
*
*
*
*
*
Mechanically-coupled pump means a
pump in which bearings external to the
driver are designed to absorb the
pump’s axial load.
*
*
*
*
*
Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal,
diffuser casing (RSH) pump means a
horizontal, multi-stage, dry rotor,
rotodynamic pump:
(1) That has a shaft input power
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less
than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter and at the number of
stages required for testing;
(2) In which liquid is discharged in a
plane perpendicular to the impeller
shaft;
(3) For which each stage (or bowl)
consists of an impeller and diffuser; and
(4) For which no external part of such
a pump is designed to be submerged in
the pumped liquid.
Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal,
end-suction diffuser casing (RSHES)
pump means a RSH pump in which the
liquid enters the bare pump in a
direction parallel to the impeller shaft
and on the side opposite the bare
pump’s driver-end.
Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal,
in-line diffuser casing (RSHIL) pump
means a single-axis flow RSH pump in
which the liquid enters the pump in a
plane perpendicular to the impeller
shaft.
Radially-split, multi-stage, vertical,
diffuser casing (RSV) pump means a
vertically suspended, multi-stage,
single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic
pump:
(1) That has a shaft input power
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less
than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter and at the number of
stages required for testing;
(2) In which liquid is discharged in a
plane perpendicular to the impeller
shaft;
(3) For which each stage (or bowl)
consists of an impeller and diffuser; and
(4) For which no external part of such
a pump is designed to be submerged in
the pumped liquid.
*
*
*
*
*
Small vertical in-line (SVIL) pump
means a small vertical twin-head pump
or a single stage, single-axis flow, dry
rotor, rotodynamic pump that:
(1) Has a shaft input power less than
1 horsepower at its BEP at full impeller
diameter; and
(2) In which liquid is discharged in a
plane perpendicular to the shaft; and
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(3) Is not a circulator pump.
Small vertical twin-head pump means
a dry rotor, single-axis flow,
rotodynamic pump that contains two
equivalent impeller assemblies, each of
which:
(1) Contains an impeller, impeller
shaft (or motor shaft in the case of closecoupled pumps), shaft seal or packing,
driver (if present), and mechanical
equipment (if present); and
(2) Has a shaft input power that is less
than or equal to 1 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter; and
(3) Has the same primary energy
source (if sold with a driver) and the
same electrical, physical, and functional
characteristics that affect energy
consumption or energy efficiency; and
(4) Is mounted in its own volute; and
(5) Discharges liquid through its
volute and the common discharge in a
plane perpendicular to the impeller
shaft.
*
*
*
*
*
Submersible turbine (ST) pump
means a single-stage or multi-stage, dry
rotor, rotodynamic pump that is
designed to be operated with the motor
and stage(s) fully submerged in the
pumped liquid; that has a shaft input
power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and
full impeller diameter and at the
number of stages required for testing;
and in which each stage of this pump
consists of an impeller and diffuser, and
liquid enters and exits each stage of the
bare pump in a direction parallel to the
impeller shaft.
*
*
*
*
*
Vertical turbine (VT) pump means a
vertically suspended, single-stage or
multi-stage, dry rotor, single inlet,
rotodynamic pump:
(1) That has a shaft input power
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less
than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter and at the number of
stages required for testing;
(2) For which the pump driver is not
designed to be submerged in the
pumped liquid;
(3) That has a single pressure
containing boundary (i.e., is single
casing), which may consist of, but is not
limited, to bowls, columns, and
discharge heads; and
(4) That discharges liquid through the
same casing in which the impeller shaft
is contained.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Revise § 431.463 to read as follows:
§ 431.463 Materials incorporated by
reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by
reference into this subpart with the
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
approval of the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce
any edition other than that specified in
this section, DOE must publish a
document in the Federal Register and
the material must be available to the
public. All approved incorporation by
reference (IBR) is available for
inspection at DOE, and at the National
Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). Contact DOE at: the U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy,
Building Technologies Program, Sixth
Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW,
Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–9127,
Buildings@ee.doe.gov, https://
www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/
building-technologies-office. For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, visit
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/
ibr-locations.html or email
fr.inspection@nara.gov. The material
may be obtained from the following
sources:
(b) ASME. American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Two Park
Avenue, New York, NY 10016–5990;
(800) 843–2763; www.asme.org.
(1) ASME MFC–3M–2004 (Reaffirmed
2017) (‘‘ASME MFC–3M–2004’’),
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes
Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi,
Issued January 1, 2004; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) ANSI/ASME MFC–5M–1985
(Reaffirmed 2006) (‘‘ASME MFC–5M–
1985’’), Measurement of Liquid Flow in
Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time
Ultrasonic Flowmeters, Issued July 15,
1985; IBR approved for appendix A to
this subpart.
(3) ASME MFC–8M–2001 (Reaffirmed
2011) (‘‘ASME MFC–8M–2001’’), Fluid
Flow in Closed Conduits: Connections
for Pressure Signal Transmissions
Between Primary and Secondary
Devices, Issued September 1, 2001; IBR
approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(4) ASME MFC–12M–2006
(Reaffirmed 2014) (‘‘ASME MFC–12M–
2006’’), Measurement of Fluid Flow in
Closed Conduits Using Multiport
Averaging Pitot Primary Elements,
Issued October 9, 2006; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(5) ASME MFC–16–2014,
Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed
Conduits with Electromagnetic
Flowmeters, Issued March 14, 2014; IBR
approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(6) ASME MFC–22–2007 (Reaffirmed
2014) (‘‘ASME MFC–22–2007’’),
Measurement of Liquid by Turbine
Flowmeters, Issued April 14, 2008; IBR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(c) AWWA. American Water Works
Association, Headquarters, 6666 W
Quincy Ave, Denver, CO 80235; (303)
794–7711; www.awwa.org.
(1) ANSI/AWWA E103–2015
(‘‘AWWA E103–2015’’), Horizontal and
Vertical Line-Shaft Pumps, approved 7,
2015; IBR approved for appendix A to
this subpart.
(2) [Reserved]
(d) CSA. Canadian Standards
Association, 5060 Spectrum Way, Suite
100, Mississauga, Ontario, L4W 5N6,
Canada; (800) 463–6727;
www.csagroup.org.
(1) CSA C390–10 Test methods,
marking requirements, and energy
efficiency levels for three-phase
induction motors, Updated March 2010;
IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(2) CSA C747–2009 (Reaffirmed 2014)
(‘‘CSA C747–2009 (RA 2014)’’), Energy
efficiency test methods for small motors,
CSA reaffirmed 2014; IBR approved for
appendices B and C to this subpart, as
follows:
(i) Section 1, ‘‘Scope’’;
(ii) Section 3, ‘‘Definitions’’;
(iii) Section 5, ‘‘General Test
Requirements’’; and
(iv) Section 6, ‘‘Test Method.’’
(e) FM. FM Global, 1151 BostonProvidence Turnpike, P.O. Box 9102,
Norwood, MA 02062; (781) 762–4300;
www.fmglobal.com.
(1) FM Class Number 1319, Approval
Standard for Centrifugal Fire Pumps
(Horizontal, End Suction Type), January
2015; IBR approved for § 431.462.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) HI. Hydraulic Institute, 300
Interpace Parkway, 3rd Floor,
Parsippany, NJ 07054–4406; 973–267–
9700; www.Pumps.org.
(1) ANSI/HI 9.6.1–2017 (‘‘HI 9.6.1–
2017’’) ‘‘Rotodynamic Pumps—
Guideline for NPSH Margin, ANSIapproved January 6, 2017; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) ANSI/HI 9.6.6–2016 (‘‘HI 9.6.6–
2016’’) ‘‘Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump
Piping, ANSI-approved March 23, 2016;
IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(3) ANSI/HI 9.8–2018 (‘‘HI 9.8–2018’’)
‘‘Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump Intake
Design, ANSI-approved January 8, 2018;
IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(4) ANSI/HI 14.1–14.2–2019 (‘‘HI
14.1–14.2–2019’’) ‘‘Rotodynamic Pumps
for Nomenclature and Definitions,
ANSI-approved April 9, 2019; IBR
approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(5) HI 40.6–2014 (‘‘HI 40.6–2014–B’’),
Methods for Rotodynamic Pump
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17977
Efficiency Testing, copyright 2014, IBR
approved for appendices B and C to this
subpart, excluding the following:
(i) Section 40.6.4.1 ‘‘Vertically
suspended pumps’’;
(ii) Section 40.6.4.2 ‘‘Submersible
pumps’’;
(iii) Section 40.6.5.3 ‘‘Test report’’;
(iv) Section 40.6.5.5 ‘‘Test
conditions’’;
(v) Section 40.6.5.5.2 ‘‘Speed of
rotation during test’’;
(vi) Section 40.6.6.1 ‘‘Translation of
test results to rated speed of rotation’’;
(vii) Appendix A ‘‘Test arrangements
(normative)’’: A.7 ‘‘Testing at
temperatures exceeding 30 °C (86 °F)’’;
and
(viii) Appendix B, ‘‘Reporting of test
results (normative)’’).
(6) HI 40.6–2021, Hydraulic Institute
Standard for Methods for Rotodynamic
Pump Efficiency Testing, approved
February 17, 2021; IBR approved for
appendices A and D to this subpart.
(7) HI 41.5–2022, Hydraulic Institute
Program Guideline for Circulator Pump
Energy Rating Program, approved June
16, 2022; IBR approved for appendix D
to this subpart.
(8) HI Engineering Data Book, Second
Edition copyright 1990; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(g) IEEE. Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc., 45 Hoes
Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ
08855–1331; (732) 981–0060;
www.ieee.org.
(1) IEEE 112–2017, IEEE Standard
Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction
Motors and Generators, published
February 14, 2018; IBR approved for
appendix A to this subpart.
(2) IEEE 113–1985, IEEE Guide: Test
Procedures for Direct-Current
Machines,’’ copyright 1985, IBR
approved for appendices B and C to this
subpart, as follows:
(i) Section 3, Electrical Measurements
and Power Sources for all Test
Procedures:
(A) Section 3.1, ‘‘Instrument Selection
Factors’’;
(B) Section 3.4 ‘‘Power
Measurement’’; and
(C) Section 3.5 ‘‘Power Sources’’;
(ii) Section 4, Preliminary Tests:
(A) Section 4.1, Reference Conditions,
Section 4.1.2, ‘‘Ambient Air’’; and
(B) Section 4.1, Reference Conditions,
Section 4.1.4 ‘‘Direction of Rotation’’;
and
(iii) Section 5, Performance
Determination:
(A) Section 5.4, Efficiency, Section
5.4.1, ‘‘Reference Conditions’’; and
(B) Section 5.4.3, Direct
Measurements of Input and Output,
Section 5.4.3.2 ‘‘Dynomometer or
Torquemeter Method.’’
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
17978
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(3) IEEE 114–2010 (‘‘IEEE 114–2010–
A’’), IEEE Standard Test Procedure for
Single-Phase Induction Motors,
published December 23, 2010; IBR
approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(3) IEEE 114–2010 (‘‘IEEE 114–2010’’),
‘‘IEEE Standard Test Procedure for
Single-Phase Induction Motors,’’
approved September 30, 2010, IBR
approved for appendices B and C to this
subpart, as follows:
(i) Section 3, ‘‘General tests’’, Section
3.2, ‘‘Tests with load’’;
(ii) Section 4 ‘‘Testing facilities’’; and
(iii) Section 5, ‘‘Measurements’’:
(A) Section 5.2 ‘‘Mechanical
measurements’’;
(B) Section 5.3 ‘‘Temperature
measurements’’; and
(iv) Section 6 ‘‘Tests.’’
(h) ISO. International Organization for
Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet
8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva,
Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11.
www.iso.org.
(1) ISO 1438:2017(E) (‘‘ISO
1438:2017’’), Hydrometry—Open
channel flow measurement using thinplate weirs, Third edition, April 2017;
IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(2) ISO 2186:2007(E) (‘‘ISO
2186:2007’’), Fluid flow in closed
conduits—Connections for pressure
signal transmissions between primary
and secondary elements, Second
edition, March 1, 2007; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(3) ISO 2715:2017(E) (‘‘ISO
2715:2017’’), Liquid hydrocarbons—
Volumetric measurement by turbine
flowmeter, Second edition, November 1,
2017; IBR approved for appendix A to
this subpart.
(4) ISO 3354:2008(E) (‘‘ISO
3354:2008’’), Measurement of clean
water flow in closed conduits—Velocityarea method using current-meters in full
conduits and under regular flow
conditions, Third edition, July 15, 2008;
IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(5) ISO 3966:2020(E) (‘‘ISO
3966:2020’’), Measurement of fluid flow
in closed conduits—Velocity area
method using Pitot static tubes, Third
edition, July 27, 2020; IBR approved for
appendix A to this subpart.
(6) ISO 5167–1:2003(E) (‘‘ISO 5167–
1:2003’’), Measurement of fluid flow by
means of pressure differential devices
inserted in circular cross-section
conduits running full—Part 1: General
principles and requirements, Second
edition, March 1, 2003; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(7) ISO 5198:1987(E) (‘‘ISO
5198:1987’’), Centrifugal, mixed flow
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
and axial pumps—Code for hydraulic
performance tests—Precision class, First
edition, July 1, 1987; IBR approved for
appendix A to this subpart.
(8) ISO 6416:2017(E) (‘‘ISO
6416:2017’’), Hydrometry—
Measurement of discharge by the
ultrasonic transit time (time of flight)
method, Fourth edition, October 2017;
IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(9) ISO 20456:2017(E) (‘‘ISO
20456:2017’’), Measurement of fluid
flow in closed conduits—Guidance for
the use of electromagnetic flowmeters
for conductive liquids, First edition,
September 2017; IBR approved for
appendix A to this subpart.
(i) NFPA. National Fire Protection
Association, 1 Batterymarch Park,
Quincy, MA 02169–7471; (617) 770–
3000; www.nfpa.org.
(1) NFPA 20 (‘‘NFPA 20–2016’’),
Standard for the Installation of
Stationary Pumps for Fire Protection,
2016 Edition, approved June 15, 2015,
IBR approved for § 431.462.
(2) [Reserved]
(j) NSF. NSF International, 789 N.
Dixboro Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105;
(743) 769–8010; www.nsf.org.
(1) NSF/ANSI 50–2015, Equipment
for Swimming Pools, Spas, Hot Tubs
and Other Recreational Water Facilities,
Annex C, normative Test methods for
the evaluation of centrifugal pumps,
Section C.3, Self-priming capability,
ANSI-approved January 26, 2015; IBR
approved for § 431.462 and appendices
B and C to this subpart.
(2) [Reserved]
(k) UL. UL, 333 Pfingsten Road,
Northbrook, IL 60062; (847) 272–8800;
www.ul.com.
(1) UL 448 (‘‘ANSI/UL 448–2013’’),
Standard for Safety Centrifugal
Stationary Pumps for Fire-Protection
Service, 10th Edition, June 8, 2007,
including revisions through July 12,
2013; IBR approved for § 431.462.
(2) UL 1081 (‘‘ANSI/UL 1081–2016’’),
Standard for Swimming Pool Pumps,
Filters, and Chlorinators, 7th Edition,
ANSI-approved October 21, 2016; IBR
approved for § 431.462.
■ 7. Section 431.464 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii)
to read as follows:
§ 431.464 Test procedure for the
measurement of energy efficiency, energy
consumption, and other performance
factors of pumps.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The following categories of clean
water pumps that have the
characteristics listed in paragraph
(a)(1)(iii) of this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(A) End suction close-coupled (ESCC);
(B) End suction frame mounted/own
bearings (ESFM);
(C) In-line (IL);
(D) Radially split, multi-stage,
vertical, in-line casing diffuser (RSV);
and
(E) Submersible turbine (ST) pumps.
(ii) The additional following
categories of clean water pumps that
have the characteristics listed in
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section:
(A) Radially-split, multi-stage,
horizontal, end-suction diffuser casing
(RSHES);
(B) Radially-split, multi-stage,
horizontal, in-line diffuser casing
(RSHIL);
(C) Small vertical in-line (SVIL); and
(D) Vertical Turbine (VT).
(iii) Pump characteristics:
(A) Flow rate of 25 gpm or greater at
BEP and full impeller diameter;
(B) Maximum head of 459 feet at BEP
and full impeller diameter and the
number of stages required for testing
(see section 1.2.2 of appendix A of this
subpart);
(C) Design temperature range wholly
or partially in the range of 15 to 250 °F;
(D) Designed to operate with either:
(1) A 2- or 4- or 6-pole induction
motor, or
(2) A non-induction motor with a
speed of rotation operating range that
includes speeds of rotation between
2,880 and 4,320 revolutions per minute
(rpm) and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm and/
or 960 and 1,439 revolutions per
minute, and in each case, the driver and
impeller must rotate at the same speed;
(E) For ST, and VT pumps, a 6-inch
or smaller bowl diameter; and
(F) For ESCC, and ESFM pumps, a
specific speed less than or equal to
5,000 when calculated using U.S.
customary units.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. Appendix A to subpart Y of part
431 is amended by:
■ a. Revising the note to the beginning
of the appendix;
■ b. Revising section I;
■ c. In section II,
■ i. Revising paragraphs A.1, A.2,
B.1.1.1.1, B.1.2.1.2, B.1.2.1.2.1., and
B.1.2.1.2.2; and
■ ii. Adding paragraph B.1.2.1.2.3;
■ d. In section III, revising paragraphs A
through D, E.1.2.1.2, E.1.2.1.2.1., and
E.1.2.1.2.2.;
■ e. In section IV, revising paragraphs A
through D;
■ f. In section V, revising paragraphs A
through D, E.1.1, E.1.2.1.1, E.1.2.1.1.1.
and E.1.2.1.1.2.;
■ g. In section VI, revising paragraphs A
through D;
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
h. In section VII,
i. Revising paragraphs A through D,
the definition of L full in paragraph E.1.2,
paragraphs E.1.2.1, E.1.2.1.1, E.1.2.1.1.1,
and E.1.2.1.1.2,
■ ii. Adding paragraph E.1.2.1.1.3; and
■ iii. Revising paragraph E.1.2.2;
■ i. Revising Tables 2 and 4; and
■ j. Adding Table 5.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
Appendix A to Subpart Y of Part 431—
Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Pumps
Note: Prior to September 20, 2023,
representations with respect to the energy
use or efficiency (including compliance
certifications) of pumps specified in
§ 431.464(a)(1)(i), excluding pumps listed in
§ 431.464(a)(1)(iv), must be based on testing
conducted in accordance with the applicable
provisions of this appendix as they appeared
in the January 1, 2022 edition of the Code of
Federal Regulations of subpart Y of part 431
in 10 CFR parts 200 through 499.
On or after September 20, 2023,
representations with respect to the energy
use or efficiency (including compliance
certifications) of pumps specified in
§ 431.464(a)(1)(i), excluding pumps listed in
§ 431.464(a)(1)(iv), must be based on testing
conducted in accordance with the applicable
provisions of this appendix.
Any representations with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of pumps specified
in § 431.464(a)(1)(ii), excluding pumps listed
in § 431.464(a)(1)(iv), made on or after
September 20, 2023 must be made in
accordance with the results of testing
pursuant to this appendix. Manufacturers
must use the results of testing under this
appendix to determine compliance with any
energy conservation standards established for
pumps specified in § 431.464(a)(1)(ii),
excluding pumps listed in § 431.464(a)(1)(iv),
that are published after January 1, 2022.
I. Test Procedure for Pumps
0. Incorporation by Reference.
DOE incorporated by reference in § 431.463
the entire standard for HI 40.6–2021, HI
9.6.1–2017, HI 9.6.6–2016, HI 9.8–2018, HI
14.1–14.2–2019, the HI Engineering Data
Book, ASME MFC–5M–1985, ASME MFC–
3M–2004, ASME MFC–8M–2001, ASME
MFC–12M–2006, ASME MFC–16–2014,
ASME MFC–22–2007, AWWA E103–2015,
CSA C390–10, IEEE 112–2017, IEEE 114–
2010–A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO
2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020,
ISO 5167–1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017; however,
certain enumerated provisions of HI 40.6–
2021, as follows are inapplicable. To the
extent that there is a conflict between the
terms or provisions of a referenced industry
standard and the CFR, the CFR provisions
control.
0.1 HI 40.6–2021
(a) Section 40.6.1 Scope
(b) Section 40.6.5.3 Test report
(c) Appendix B Reporting of test results
(informative)
(d) Appendix E Testing Circulator Pumps
(normative)
(e) Appendix G DOE Compared to HI 40.6
Nomenclature
0.2 [Reserved]
A. General. To determine the constant load
pump energy index (PEICL) for bare pumps
and pumps sold with electric motors or the
variable load pump energy index (PEIVL) for
pumps sold with electric motors and
continuous or non-continuous controls,
perform testing in accordance with HI 40.6–
2021, except section 40.6.5.3, ‘‘Test report’’,
including the applicable provisions of HI
9.6.1–2017, HI 9.6.6–2016, HI 9.8–2018, HI
14.1–14.2–2019, the HI Engineering Data
Book, ASME MFC–3M–2004, ASME MFC–
5M–1985, ASME MFC–8M–2001, ASME
MFC–12M–2006, ASME MFC–16–2014,
17979
ASME MFC–22–2007, AWWA E103–2015,
CSA C390–10, IEEE 112–2017, IEEE 114–
2010–A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO
2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020,
ISO 5167–1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017, as
referenced in HI 40.6, with the modifications
and additions as noted throughout the
provisions below. Where HI 40.6–2021 refers
to ‘‘pump,’’ the term refers to the ‘‘bare
pump,’’ as defined in § 431.462. Also, for the
purposes of applying this appendix, the term
‘‘volume per unit time,’’ as defined in section
40.6.2, ‘‘Terms and definitions,’’ of HI 40.6–
2021 shall be deemed to be synonymous with
the term ‘‘flow rate’’ used throughout that
standard and this appendix. In addition, the
specifications in section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6–
2021, ‘‘Vertically suspended pumps,’’ do not
apply to ST pumps and the performance of
ST bare pumps considers bowl performance
only. However, the specifications in the first
paragraph of section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6–2021
(including the applicable provisions of HI
14.1–14.2–2019, the HI Engineering Data
Book, and AWWA E103–2015, as referenced
in section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6), ‘‘Vertically
suspended pumps,’’ do apply to VT pumps
and the performance of VT bare pumps
considers bowl performance only.
A.1 Scope. Section II of this appendix
applies to all pumps and describes how to
calculate the pump energy index (section
II.A) based on the pump energy rating for the
minimally-compliant reference pump
(PERSTD; section II.B) and the constant load
pump energy rating (PERCL) or variable load
pump energy rating (PERVL) determined in
accordance with one of sections III through
VII of this appendix, based on the
configuration in which the pump is
distributed in commerce and the applicable
testing method specified in sections III
through VII and as described in Table 1 of
this appendix.
TABLE 1—APPLICABILITY OF CALCULATION-BASED AND TESTING-BASED TEST PROCEDURE OPTIONS BASED ON PUMP
CONFIGURATION
Pump configuration
Pump sub-configuration
Applicable test methods
Bare Pump ......................................
Bare Pump OR Pump + Single-Phase Induction Motor (Excluding
SVIL) OR Pump + Driver Other Than Electric Motor.
Pump + Motor Listed at § 431.25(g) OR SVIL Pump + Motor Covered
by DOE’s Test Procedure and/or Energy Conservation Standards *
OR Pump + Submersible Motor.
Section III: Test Procedure for
Bare Pumps.
Section IV: Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold with Motors OR Section V: CalculationBased Approach for Pumps
Sold with Motors.
Section IV: Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold with Motors.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Pump + Motor OR Pump + Motor +
Controls other than continuous or
non-continuous controls (e.g.,
ON/OFF switches).
Pump + Motor + Continuous Controls OR Pump + Motor + NonContinuous Controls OR Pump +
Inverter-Only Synchronous Electric Motor *** (With or Without
Controls).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Pump (Including SVIL) + Motor Not Covered by DOE’s Motor Energy
Conservation Standards (Except Submersible Motors) ** OR Pump
(Other than SVIL) + Single-Phase Induction Motor (if Section III is
not used).
Pump + Motor Listed at § 431.25(g) + Continuous Control OR SVIL
Pump + Motor Covered by DOE’s Test Procedure and/or Energy
Conservation Standards * + Continuous Control OR Pump + Submersible Motor + Continuous Control OR Pump + Inverter-Only
Synchronous Electric Motor *** (With or Without Continuous Control).
Pump + Motor Listed at § 431.25(g) + Non-Continuous Control OR
SVIL Pump + Motor Covered by DOE’s Test Procedure and/or Energy Conservation Standards * + Non-Continuous Control OR
Pump + Submersible Motor + Non-Continuous Control.
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
Section VI: Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold with Motors and Controls OR Section
VII: Calculation-Based Approach
for Pumps Sold with Motors
Controls.
Section VI: Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold with Motors and Controls.
24MRR2
17980
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—APPLICABILITY OF CALCULATION-BASED AND TESTING-BASED TEST PROCEDURE OPTIONS BASED ON PUMP
CONFIGURATION—Continued
Pump configuration
Pump sub-configuration
Applicable test methods
Pump (Including SVIL) + Motor Not Covered by DOE’s Motor Test
Procedure and/or Energy Conservation Standards ** (Except Submersible Motors) + Continuous or Non-Continuous Controls OR
Pump (Other than SVIL) + Single-Phase Induction Motor + Continuous or Non-Continuous Controls (if Section III is not used).
Section VI: Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold with Motors and Controls.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
* All references to ‘‘Motor Covered by DOE’s Motor Test Procedure and/or Energy Conservation Standards’’ refer to those listed at § 431.446
of this chapter or those for Small Non-Small Electric Motor Electric Motors (SNEMs) at Subpart B to Part 431, including motors of such varieties
that are less than 0.25 hp.
** All references to ‘‘Motor Not Covered by DOE’s Test Procedure and/or Motor Energy Conservation Standards’’ refer to motors not listed at
§ 431.25 of this chapter or, for SVIL, not listed at either § 431.446 of this chapter or in Subpart B to Part 431 (excluding motors of such varieties
that are less than 0.25 hp).
*** All references to ‘‘Inverter-Only Synchronous Electric Motor’’ refer to inverter-only electric motors that are synchronous electric motors, both
as defined in subpart B to Part 431.
A.2 Section III of this appendix addresses
the test procedure applicable to bare pumps.
This test procedure also applies to pumps
sold with drivers other than motors and
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, ST,
and VT pumps sold with single-phase
induction motors.
A.3 Section IV of this appendix addresses
the testing-based approach for pumps sold
with motors, which applies to all pumps sold
with electric motors, except for pumps sold
with inverter-only synchronous electric
motors, but including pumps sold with
single-phase induction motors. This test
procedure also applies to pumps sold with
controls other than continuous or noncontinuous controls (e.g., on/off switches).
A.4 Section V of this appendix addresses
the calculation-based approach for pumps
sold with motors, which applies to:
A.4.1 Pumps sold with polyphase electric
motors regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards for electric motors at
§ 431.25(g), and
A.4.2 SVIL pumps sold with small
electric motors regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards at § 431.446 or sold
with SNEMs regulated by DOE’s test
procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part but
including motors of such varieties that are
less than 0.25 hp, and
A.4.3 Pumps sold with submersible
motors.
A.5 Section VI of this appendix addresses
the testing-based approach for pumps sold
with motors and controls, which applies to
all pumps sold with electric motors
(including single-phase induction motors)
and continuous or non-continuous controls
and to pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors with or without
controls.
A.6 Section VII of this appendix
discusses the calculation-based approach for
pumps sold with motors and controls, which
applies to:
A.6.1 Pumps sold with polyphase electric
motors regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards for electric motors at
§ 431.25(g) and continuous controls and
A.6.2 Pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors regulated by
DOE’s test procedure and/or energy
conservation standards in subpart B of this
part,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
A.6.3 SVIL pumps sold with small
electric motors regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards at § 431.446 (but
including motors of such varieties that are
less than 0.25 hp) and continuous controls or
with SNEMs regulated by DOE’s test
procedure and/or energy conservation
standards at subpart B of this part (but
including motors of such varieties that are
less than 0.25 hp) and continuous controls,
and
A.6.4 Pumps sold with submersible
motors and continuous controls.
B. Measurement Equipment.
B.1 Instrument Accuracy. For the
purposes of measuring pump power input,
driver power input to the motor or controls,
and pump power output, the equipment
specified in HI 40.6–2021 Appendix C
(including the applicable provisions of
ASME MFC–5M–1985, ASME MFC–3M–
2004, ASME MFC–8M–2001, ASME MFC–
12M–2006, ASME MFC–16–2014, ASME
MFC–22–2007, CSA C390–10, IEEE 112–
2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO
2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008,
ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167–1:2003, ISO
5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO
20456:2017, as referenced in Appendix C of
HI 40.6) necessary to measure head, speed of
rotation, flow rate, temperature, torque, and
electrical power must be used and must
comply with the stated accuracy
requirements in HI 40.6–2021 Table
40.6.3.2.3 except as noted in sections III.B,
IV.B, V.B, VI.B, and VII.B of this appendix.
When more than one instrument is used to
measure a given parameter, the combined
accuracy, calculated as the root sum of
squares of individual instrument accuracies,
must meet the specified accuracy
requirements.
B.2 Calibration. Calibration requirements
for instrumentation are specified in
Appendix D of HI 40.6–2021.
C. Test Conditions. Conduct testing at full
impeller diameter in accordance with the test
conditions, stabilization requirements, and
specifications of HI 40.6–2021 Section 40.6.3,
‘‘Pump efficiency testing;’’ Section 40.6.4,
‘‘Considerations when determining the
efficiency of certain pumps’’ including the
applicable provisions of HI 14.1–14.2–2019,
the HI Engineering Data Book, and AWWA
E103–2015, as referenced in section 40.6.4 of
HI 40.6; section 40.6.5.4 (including appendix
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
A), ‘‘Test arrangements,’’ including the
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017, HI
9.6.6–2016, HI 9.8–2018, HI Engineering Data
Book, and AWWA E103–2015 as referenced
in appendix A of HI 40.6; and section
40.6.5.5, ‘‘Test conditions’’ including the
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–
2021. For ST pumps, head measurements
must be based on the bowl assembly total
head as described in section A.5 of 40.6–
2021, including the applicable provisions of
the HI Engineering Data Book and AWWA
E103–2015 as referenced in ins section A.5
of HI 40.6–2021, and the pump power input
or driver power input, as applicable, must be
based on the measured input power to the
driver or bare pump, respectively; section
40.6.4.1, ‘‘Vertically suspended pumps,’’
does not apply to ST pumps.
C.1 Nominal Speed of Rotation.
Determine the nominal speed of rotation
based on the range of speeds of rotation at
which the pump is designed to operate, in
accordance with sections I.C.1.1, I.C.1.2, and
I.C.1.3 of this appendix, as applicable. When
determining the range of speeds at which the
pump is designed to operate, DOE will refer
to published data, marketing literature, and
other publicly-available information about
the pump model and motor, as applicable.
C.1.1 For pumps sold without motors,
select the nominal speed of rotation based on
the speed for which the pump is designed.
C.1.1.1 For bare pumps designed for
speeds of rotation including 2,880 to 4,320
revolutions per minute (rpm), the nominal
speed of rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
C.1.1.2 For bare pumps designed for
speeds of rotation including 1,440 to 2,160
rpm, the nominal speed of rotation shall be
1,800 rpm.
C.1.1.3 For bare pumps designed for
speeds of rotation including 960 to 1,439
rpm, the nominal speed of rotation shall be
1,200 rpm.
C.1.2 For pumps sold with induction
motors, select the appropriate nominal speed
of rotation.
C.1.2.1 For pumps sold with 6-pole
induction motors, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
C.1.2.2 For pumps sold with 4-pole
induction motors, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 1,800 rpm.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
II. Calculation of the Pump Energy Index
A. * * *
A.1. For pumps rated as bare pumps or
pumps sold with motors (other than inverteronly synchronous electric motors), determine
the PEI CL using the following equation:
Where:
PEI CL = the pump energy index for a
constant load (hp),
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
PER CL = the pump energy rating for a
constant load (hp), determined in
accordance with either section III (for
bare pumps; ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES,
RSHIL, RSV, ST or VT pumps sold with
single-phase induction motors; and
pumps sold with drivers other than
electric motors), section IV (for pumps
sold with motors and rated using the
testing-based approach), or section V (for
pumps sold with motors and rated using
the calculation-based approach) of this
appendix, and
PER STD = the PER CL for a pump that is
minimally compliant with DOE’s energy
conservation standards with the same
flow and specific speed characteristics as
the tested pump (hp), as determined in
accordance with section II.B of this
appendix.
A.2 For pumps rated as pumps sold with
motors and continuous controls or noncontinuous controls (including pumps sold
with inverter-only synchronous electric
motors with or without controls), determine
the PEI VL using the following equation:
PEI VL = the pump energy index for a variable
load (hp),
PER VL = the pump energy rating for a
variable load (hp), determined in
accordance with section VI (for pumps
sold with motors and continuous or noncontinuous controls rated using the
testing-based approach) or section VII of
this appendix (for pumps sold with
motors and continuous controls rated
using the calculation-based approach),
and
PER STD = the PER CL for a pump that is
minimally compliant with DOE’s energy
conservation standards with the same
flow and specific speed characteristics as
the tested pump (hp), as determined in
accordance with section II.B of this
appendix.
B. * * *
B.1.1.1.1 Determine the specific speed of
the rated pump using the following equation:
Where:
Ns = specific speed,
nsp = the nominal speed of rotation (rpm),
Q’100% = the measured BEP flow rate of the
tested pump at full impeller and nominal
speed of rotation (gpm),
H100% = pump total head at 100 percent of the
BEP flow rate of the tested pump at full
impeller and nominal speed of rotation
(ft), and
S = the number of stages with which the
pump is being rated
B.1.2.1.2 Determine the default nominal full
load motor efficiency as described in
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
ER24MR23.006</GPH>
selected for the pump in section I.C.1 of this
appendix, in accordance with the procedures
specified in section 40.6.6.1.1 of HI 40.6–
2021. Except for the ‘‘expected BEP flow
rate,’’ all terms and quantities refer to values
determined in accordance with the
procedures set forth in this appendix for the
rated pump. Perform all calculations using
raw measured values without rounding.
Round PER CL and PER VL to three significant
digits, and round PEI CL, and PEI VL values,
as applicable, to the hundredths place (i.e.,
0.01).
D.4 Pumps with BEP at Run Out. Test
pumps for which the expected BEP
corresponds to a volume rate of flow that is
within 20 percent of the expected maximum
flow rate at which the pump is designed to
operate continuously or safely (i.e., pumps
with BEP at run-out) in accordance with the
test procedure specified in this appendix, but
with the following exceptions:
D.4.1 Use the following seven flow
points—40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100
percent of the expected maximum flow rate
for determination of BEP in sections III.D,
IV.D, V.D, VI.D, and VII.D of this appendix
instead of the flow points specified in those
sections.
D.4.2 Use flow points of 60, 70, 80, 90,
and 100 percent of the expected maximum
flow rate of the pump to determine pump
power input or driver power input instead of
the flow points of 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and
120 percent of the expected BEP flow rate
specified in sections III.E.1.1, IV.E.1, V.E.1.1,
VI.E.1, and VII.E.1.1 of this appendix.
D.4.3 To determine PER CL in sections
III.E, IV.E, and V.E and to determine PER STD
in section II.B, use load points of 65, 90, and
100 percent of the BEP flow rate determined
with the modified flow points specified in
this section I.D.4 of this appendix instead of
75, 100, and 110 percent of BEP flow. In
section II.B.1.1, where alpha values are
specified for the load points 75, 100, and 110
percent of BEP flow rate, instead apply the
alpha values to the load points of 65, 90, and
100 percent of the BEP flow rate determined
with the modified flow points specified in
this section I.D.4 of this appendix. However,
in sections II.B.1.1.1 and II.B.1.1.1.1 of this
appendix, use 100 percent of the BEP flow
rate as specified to determine hpump,STD and
Ns as specified. To determine motor sizing
for bare pumps in sections II.B.1.2.1.1 and
III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, use a load point
of 100 percent of the BEP flow rate instead
of 120 percent.
ER24MR23.005</GPH>
C.1.2.3 For pumps sold with 2-pole
induction motors, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
C.1.3 For pumps sold with non-induction
motors, select the appropriate nominal speed
of rotation.
C.1.3.1 Where the operating range of the
pump and motor includes speeds of rotation
between 2,880 and 4,320 rpm, the nominal
speed of rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
C.1.3.2 Where the operating range of the
pump and motor includes speeds of rotation
between 1,440 and 2,160 rpm, the nominal
speed of rotation shall be 1,800 rpm.
C.1.3.3 Where the operating range of the
pump and motor includes speeds of rotation
between 960 and 1,439, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
C.2 Multi-Stage Pumps. Perform testing
on the pump with three stages for RSH and
RSV pumps, and nine stages for ST and VT
pumps. If the basic model of pump being
tested is only available with fewer than the
required number of stages, test the pump
with the maximum number of stages with
which the basic model is distributed in
commerce in the United States. If the basic
model of pump being tested is only available
with greater than the required number of
stages, test the pump with the lowest number
of stages with which the basic model is
distributed in commerce in the United States.
If the basic model of pump being tested is
available with both fewer and greater than
the required number of stages, but not the
required number of stages, test the pump
with the number of stages closest to the
required number of stages. If both the next
lower and next higher number of stages are
equivalently close to the required number of
stages, test the pump with the next higher
number of stages.
C.3 Twin-Head Pumps. For twin-head
pumps, perform testing on an equivalent
single impeller IL or SVIL pump as
applicable, constructed by incorporating one
of the driver and impeller assemblies of the
twin-head pump being rated into an adequate
IL-style or SVIL-style, single impeller volute
and casing. An adequate IL-style or SVILstyle, single impeller volute and casing
means a volute and casing for which any
physical and functional characteristics that
affect energy consumption and energy
efficiency are the same as their
corresponding characteristics for a single
impeller in the twin-head pump volute and
casing.
D. Data Collection and Analysis.
D.1 Damping Devices. Use of damping
devices, as described in section 40.6.3.2.2 of
HI 40.6–2021, are only permitted to integrate
up to the data collection interval used during
testing.
D.2 Stabilization. Record data at any
tested load point only under stabilized
conditions, as defined in HI 40.6–2021
section 40.6.5.5.1, including the applicable
provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017 as referenced in
section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6, where a
minimum of two measurements are used to
determine stabilization.
D.3 Calculations and Rounding.
Normalize all measured data to the nominal
speed of rotation of 3,600 or 1,800 or 1,200
rpm based on the nominal speed of rotation
17981
ER24MR23.004</GPH>
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
17982
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
section II.B.1.2.1.2.1 of this appendix for
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV,
and VT pumps; section II.B.1.2.1.2.2 of
this appendix for ST pumps; and section
II.B.1.2.1.2.3 for SVIL pumps.
B.1.2.1.2.1. For ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES,
RSHIL, RSV, and VT pumps, the default
nominal full load motor efficiency is the
minimum of the nominal full load motor
efficiency standards (open or enclosed) from
the table containing the current energy
conservation standards for NEMA Design B
motors at § 431.25, with the number of poles
relevant to the speed at which the pump is
being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this
appendix.
B.1.2.1.2.2. For ST pumps, prior to the
compliance date of any energy conservation
standards for submersible motors in subpart
B of this part, the default nominal full load
motor efficiency is the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency listed in
table 2 of this appendix, with the number of
poles relevant to the speed at which the
pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this
appendix. Starting on the compliance date of
any energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part,
the default nominal full load motor efficiency
shall be the minimum of any nominal full
load motor efficiency standard from the table
containing energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part,
with the number of poles relevant to the
speed at which the pump is being tested (see
section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor
horsepower determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1
of this appendix.
B.1.2.1.2.3. For SVIL pumps, the default
nominal full load motor efficiency is the
minimum full load motor efficiency standard
from the tables containing the current energy
conservation standards for polyphase or
CSCR/CSIR small electric motors at
§ 431.446, with the number of poles relevant
to the speed at which the pump is being
tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and
the motor horsepower determined in section
II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, or for SVIL
pumps sold with motors less than 0.25 hp,
the default nominal full load motor efficiency
is 58.3% for 6-pole, 64.6% for 4-pole, and
61.7% for 2-pole motors.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
*
*
*
*
*
III. Test Procedure for Bare Pumps
A. Scope. This section III applies only to:
A.1 Bare pumps,
A.2 Pumps sold with drivers other than
electric motors, and
A.3 ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL,
RSV, ST, and VT pumps sold with singlephase induction motors.
B. Measurement Equipment. The
requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this
appendix apply to this section III. In
addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, electrical measurement
equipment shall meet the requirements of
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6–2021 (including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power
input shall be determined according to
section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6–2021 and meet
the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI
40.6–2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements
regarding test conditions presented in section
I.C of this appendix apply to this section III.
In addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, the conditions in section
C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021 shall be met,
including the applicable provisions of CSA
C390–10, IEEE 112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A,
as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–
2021.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine
the best efficiency point (BEP) of the pump
as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump
without changing the speed of rotation of the
pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75,
90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected
BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section
40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–
2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the
flow rate at the operating point of maximum
pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with
section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021, where the
pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump
power output divided by the pump power
input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6–
2021, disregarding the calculations provided
in section 40.6.6.2 of HI 40.6–2021.
*
*
*
*
*
E.1.2.1.2 Determine the default nominal
full load motor efficiency as described in
section III.E.1.2.1.2.1 of this appendix for
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and
VT pumps; or section III.E.1.2.1.2.2. of this
appendix for ST pumps; or section
III.E.1.2.1.2.3 of this appendix for SVIL
pumps.
E.1.2.1.2.1. For ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES,
RSHIL, RSV, and VT pumps, the default
nominal full load motor efficiency is the
minimum of the nominal full load motor
efficiency standards (open or enclosed) from
the table containing the current energy
conservation standards for NEMA Design B
motors at § 431.25, with the number of poles
relevant to the speed at which the pump is
being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this
appendix.
E.1.2.1.2.2. For ST pumps, prior to the
compliance date of any energy conservation
standards for submersible motors in subpart
B of this part, the default nominal full load
motor efficiency is the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency listed in
table 2 of this appendix, with the number of
poles relevant to the speed at which the
pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this
appendix. Starting on the compliance date of
any energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part,
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the default nominal full load motor efficiency
is the minimum of any nominal full load
motor efficiency standard from the table
containing energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part,
with the number of poles relevant to the
speed at which the pump is being tested (see
section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor
horsepower determined in accordance with
section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
E.1.2.1.2.3. For SVIL pumps, the default
nominal full load motor efficiency is the
minimum full load motor efficiency standard
from the tables containing the current energy
conservation standards for polyphase or
CSCR/CSIR small electric motors at
§ 431.446, with the number of poles relevant
to the speed at which the pump is being
tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and
the motor horsepower determined in section
III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, or for SVIL
pumps sold with motors less than 0.25 hp,
the default nominal full load motor efficiency
is 58.3% for 6-pole, 64.6% for 4-pole, and
61.7% for 2-pole motors.
*
*
*
*
*
IV. Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold
With Motors
A. Scope. This section IV applies only to
pumps sold with electric motors (excluding
pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous
electric motors regulated by DOE’s test
procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part), including
single-phase induction motors.
B. Measurement Equipment. The
requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this
appendix apply to this section IV. In
addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, electrical measurement
equipment shall meet the requirements of
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6–2021 (including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power
input shall be determined according to
section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6–2021 and meet
the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI
40.6–2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements
regarding test conditions presented in section
I.C of this appendix apply to this section IV.
In addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, the conditions in section
C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in Section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6, shall be met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine
the best efficiency point (BEP) of the pump
as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump
without changing the speed of rotation of the
pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75,
90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected
BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section
40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–
2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the
flow rate at the operating point of maximum
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with
Section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021, where the
pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump
power output divided by the pump power
input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6–
2021, disregarding the calculations provided
in section 40.6.6.2 of HI 40.6–2021.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
*
*
*
*
*
V. Calculation-Based Approach for Pumps
Sold With Motors
A. Scope. This section V can only be used
in lieu of the test method in section IV of this
appendix to calculate the index for pumps
sold with motors listed in section V.A.1,
V.A.2, or V.A.3 of this appendix.
A.1 Pumps sold with motors subject to
DOE’s energy conservation standards for
polyphase electric motors at § 431.25(g),
A.2 SVIL pumps sold with small electric
motors regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards at § 431.446 or with
SNEMs regulated by DOE’s test procedure
and/or energy conservation standards in
subpart B of this part but including motors
of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp,
and
A.3. Pumps sold with submersible motors.
A.4. Pumps sold with motors not listed in
sections V.A.1, V.A.2, or V.A.3 of this
appendix cannot use this section V and must
apply the test method in section IV of this
appendix.
B. Measurement Equipment. The
requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this
appendix apply to this section V. In addition,
when testing pumps using a calibrated motor,
electrical measurement equipment shall meet
the requirements of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6–
2021 (including the applicable provisions of
CSA C390–10, IEEE 112–2017, IEEE 114–
2010–A, as referenced in section C.4.3 of HI
40.6), and motor power input shall be
determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of
HI 40.6–2021 and meet the requirements in
Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6–2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements
regarding test conditions presented in section
I.C of this appendix apply to this section V.
In addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, the conditions in section
C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021 shall be
met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine
the best efficiency point (BEP) of the pump
as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the
pump without changing the speed of rotation
of the pump and conduct the test at a
minimum of the following seven flow points:
40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of
the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at
the nominal speed of rotation, as specified in
section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including
the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–
2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the
flow rate at the operating point of maximum
pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021, where the
pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump
power output divided by the pump power
input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6–
2021, disregarding the calculations provided
in section 40.6.6.2.
*
*
*
*
*
E.1.1 Determine the pump power input at
75, 100, and 110 percent of the BEP flow rate
by employing a least squares regression to
determine a linear relationship between the
pump power input at the nominal speed of
rotation of the pump and the measured flow
rate at the following load points: 60, 75, 90,
100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected
BEP flow rate. Use the linear relationship to
determine the pump power input at the
nominal speed of rotation for the load points
of 75, 100, and 110 percent of the BEP flow
rate.
*
*
*
*
*
E.1.2.1.1 For pumps sold with motors
other than submersible motors, determine the
represented nominal full load motor
efficiency as described in section
V.E.1.2.1.1.1 of this appendix. For pumps
sold with submersible motors, determine the
default nominal full load submersible motor
efficiency as described in section
V.E.1.2.1.1.2 of this appendix.
E.1.2.1.1.1 For pumps sold with motors
other than submersible motors, the
represented nominal full load motor
efficiency is that of the motor with which the
given pump model is being tested, as
determined in accordance with the DOE test
procedure for electric motors at § 431.16 or,
for SVIL, the DOE test procedure for small
electric motors at § 431.444, or the DOE test
procedure for SNEMs in subpart B to this
part, as applicable (including for motors less
than 0.25 hp), and if available, applicable
representation procedures in 10 CFR part 429
and this part.
E.1.2.1.1.2 For pumps sold with
submersible motors, prior to the compliance
date of any energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part,
the default nominal full load submersible
motor efficiency is that listed in table 2 of
this appendix, with the number of poles
relevant to the speed at which the pump is
being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower of the
pump being tested, or if a test procedure for
submersible motors is provided in subpart B
to this part, the represented nominal full load
motor efficiency of the motor with which the
given pump model is being tested, as
determined in accordance with the
applicable test procedure in subpart B to this
part and applicable representation
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part,
may be used instead. Starting on the
compliance date of any energy conservation
standards for submersible motors in subpart
B of this part, the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency may no longer
be used. Instead, the represented nominal
full load motor efficiency of the motor with
which the given pump model is being tested,
as determined in accordance with the
applicable test procedure in subpart B of this
part and applicable representation
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
17983
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part,
must be used.
*
*
*
*
*
VI. Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold
With Motors and Controls
A. Scope. This section VI applies only to
pumps sold with electric motors, including
single-phase induction motors, and
continuous or non-continuous controls, as
well as to pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors that are
regulated by DOE’s test procedure and/or
energy conservation standards in subpart B of
this part (with or without controls). For the
purposes of this section VI, all references to
‘‘driver input power’’ in this section VI or HI
40.6–2021 refer to the input power to the
continuous or non-continuous controls.
B. Measurement Equipment. The
requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this
appendix apply to this section VI. In
addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, electrical measurement
equipment shall meet the requirements of
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6–2021 (including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power
input shall be determined according to
section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6–2021 and meet
the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI
40.6–2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements
regarding test conditions presented in section
I.C of this appendix apply to this section VI.
In addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, the conditions in section
C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6, shall be met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine
the best efficiency point (BEP) of the pump
as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump
without changing the speed of rotation of the
pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75,
90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected
BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section
40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1–2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6–
2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the
flow rate at the operating point of maximum
pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with
section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021, where the
pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump
power output divided by the pump power
input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6–
2021, disregarding the calculations provided
in section 40.6.6.2.
*
*
*
*
*
VII. Calculation-Based Approach for Pumps
Sold With Motors and Controls
A. Scope. This section VII can only be used
in lieu of the test method in section VI of this
appendix to calculate the index for pumps
listed in sections VII.A.1, VII.A.2, VII.A.3,
and VII.A.4 of this appendix.
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
A.1. Pumps sold with motors regulated by
DOE’s energy conservation standards for
polyphase NEMA Design B electric motors at
§ 431.25(g) and continuous controls,
A.2. Pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors regulated by
DOE’s test procedure and/or energy
conservation standards in subpart B of this
part,
A.3. SVIL pumps sold with small electric
motors regulated by DOE’s energy
conservation standards at § 431.446 or with
SNEMs regulated by DOE’s test procedure
and/or energy conservation standards in
subpart B of this part (but including motors
of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp)
and continuous controls,
A.4. Pumps sold with submersible motors
and continuous controls, and
A.5. Pumps sold with motors not listed in
sections VII.A.1, VII.A.2, VII.A.3, and VII.A.4
of this appendix and pumps sold without
continuous controls, including pumps sold
with non-continuous controls, cannot use
this section and must apply the test method
in section VI of this appendix.
B. Measurement Equipment. The
requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this
appendix apply to this section VII. In
addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, electrical measurement
equipment shall meet the requirements of
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6–2021 (including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power
input shall be determined according to
section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6–2021 and meet
the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI
40.6–2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements
regarding test conditions presented in section
I.C of this appendix apply to this section VII.
In addition, when testing pumps using a
calibrated motor, the conditions in section
C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390–10, IEEE
112–2017, IEEE 114–2010–A, as referenced
in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6–2021 shall be
met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine
the best efficiency point (BEP) of the pump
as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump
without changing the speed of rotation of the
pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75,
90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected
BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in HI 40.6–
2021, except section 40.6.5.3, and appendix
B, including the applicable provisions of HI
9.6.1–2017, HI 9.6.6–2016, HI 9.8–2018, HI
14.1–14.2–2019, the HI Engineering Data
Book, ASME MFC–3M–2004, ASME MFC–
5M–1985, ASME MFC–8M–2001, ASME
MFC–12M–2006, ASME MFC–16–2014,
ASME MFC–22–2007, AWWA E103–2015,
CSA C390–10, IEEE 112–2017, IEEE 114–
2010–A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO
2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020,
ISO 5167–1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017, as
referenced in HI 40.6–2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the
flow rate at the operating point of maximum
pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with
section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6–2021, where the
pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump
power output divided by the pump power
input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6–
2021, disregarding the calculations provided
in section 40.6.6.2.
Where:
Lfull = motor losses at full load (hp), or for
inverter-only synchronous electric
motors, motor + inverter losses at full
load,
MotorHP = the horsepower of the motor with
which the pump model is being tested
(hp), and
h motor,full = the represented nominal full load
motor efficiency (i.e., nameplate/DOEcertified value) or the represented
nominal full load motor + inverter
efficiency or the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency as
determined in accordance with section
VII.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix (%).
E.1.2.1.1 For pumps sold with motors
other than inverter-only synchronous electric
motors or submersible motors, determine the
represented nominal full load motor
efficiency as described in section
VII.E.1.2.1.1.1 of this appendix. For pumps
sold with inverter-only synchronous electric
motors, determine the represented nominal
full load motor + inverter efficiency as
described in section VII.E.1.2.1.1.2 of this
appendix. For pumps sold with submersible
motors, determine the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency as
described in section VII.E.1.2.1.1.3 of this
appendix.
E.1.2.1.1.1 For pumps sold with motors
other than inverter-only synchronous electric
motors or submersible motors, the
represented nominal full load motor
efficiency is that of the motor with which the
given pump model is being tested, as
determined in accordance with the DOE test
procedure for electric motors at § 431.16 or,
for SVIL, the DOE test procedure for small
electric motors at § 431.444 or the DOE test
procedure for SNEMs in subpart B of this
part, as applicable (including for motors less
than 0.25 hp), and, if available, applicable
representation procedures in 10 CFR part 429
and this part.
E.1.2.1.1.2 For pumps sold with inverteronly synchronous electric motors, the
represented nominal full load motor +
inverter efficiency is that of the motor with
which the given pump model is being tested,
as determined in accordance with the DOE
test procedure for inverter-only synchronous
electric motors in subpart B of this part, and,
if available, applicable representation
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part.
E.1.2.1.1.3 For pumps sold with
submersible motors, prior to the compliance
date of any energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part,
the default nominal full load submersible
motor efficiency is that listed in table 2 of
this appendix, with the number of poles
relevant to the speed at which the pump is
being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower of the
pump being tested, or if a test procedure for
submersible motors is provided in subpart B
of this part, the represented nominal full load
motor efficiency of the motor with which the
given pump model is being tested, as
determined in accordance with the
applicable test procedure in subpart B of this
part and applicable representation
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
*
*
E.1.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * *
*
Lfull = motor losses at full load or, for
inverter-only synchronous electric motors,
motor + inverter losses at full load, as
determined in accordance with section
VII.E.1.2.1 of this appendix (hp),
*
*
*
*
*
E.1.2.1 Determine the full load motor
losses using the appropriate motor efficiency
value and horsepower as shown in the
following equation:
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
ER24MR23.007</GPH>
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
17984
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
17985
may be used instead. Starting on the
compliance date of any energy conservation
standards for submersible motors in subpart
B of this part, the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency may no longer
be used and instead the represented nominal
full load motor efficiency of the motor with
which the given pump model is being tested,
as determined in accordance with the
applicable test procedure in subpart B of this
part and applicable representation
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part,
must be used instead.
E.1.2.2 For load points corresponding to
25, 50, 75, and 100 percent of the BEP flow
rate, determine the part load loss factor at
each load point as follows:
Where:
z i = the motor and control part load loss
factor at load point i,
a,b,c = coefficients listed in either Table 4 of
this appendix for induction motors or
Table 5 of this appendix for inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, based on
the horsepower of the motor with which
the pump is being tested,
P i = the pump power input to the bare pump
at load point i, as determined in
accordance with section VII.E.1.1 of this
appendix (hp),
MotorHP = the horsepower of the motor with
which the pump is being tested (hp),
TABLE 2—DEFAULT NOMINAL FULL LOAD SUBMERSIBLE MOTOR EFFICIENCY BY MOTOR HORSEPOWER AND POLE
Default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency
Motor horsepower
(hp)
2 poles
1 .......................................................................................................................................
1.5 ....................................................................................................................................
2 .......................................................................................................................................
3 .......................................................................................................................................
5 .......................................................................................................................................
7.5 ....................................................................................................................................
10 .....................................................................................................................................
15 .....................................................................................................................................
20 .....................................................................................................................................
25 .....................................................................................................................................
30 .....................................................................................................................................
40 .....................................................................................................................................
50 .....................................................................................................................................
60 .....................................................................................................................................
75 .....................................................................................................................................
100 ...................................................................................................................................
125 ...................................................................................................................................
150 ...................................................................................................................................
200 ...................................................................................................................................
250 ...................................................................................................................................
*
*
68
70
70
75.5
75.5
74
74
75.5
77
78.5
80
81.5
82.5
84
85.5
84
84
85.5
86.5
86.5
64
72
74
75.5
75.5
72
72
74
74
77
78.5
81.5
81.5
82.5
82.5
82.5
82.5
85.5
85.5
85.5
*
ER24MR23.009</GPH>
*
55
66
68
70
74
68
70
72
72
74
77
78.5
80
81.5
81.5
81.5
84
84
85.5
86.5
6 poles
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
ER24MR23.008</GPH>
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
*
4 poles
17986
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4—INDUCTION MOTOR AND CONTROL PART LOAD LOSS FACTOR EQUATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SECTION
VII.E.1.2.2 OF THIS APPENDIX A
Coefficients for induction motor and control part
load loss factor
(zi)
Motor horsepower
(hp)
a
≤5 .................................................................................................................................................
>5 and ≤20 ...................................................................................................................................
>20 and ≤50 .................................................................................................................................
>50 and ≤100 ...............................................................................................................................
>100 .............................................................................................................................................
b
¥0.4658
¥1.3198
¥1.5122
¥0.6629
¥0.7583
c
1.4965
2.9551
3.0777
2.1452
2.4538
0.5303
0.1052
0.1847
0.1952
0.2233
TABLE 5—INVERTER-ONLY SYNCHRONOUS ELECTRIC MOTOR AND CONTROL PART LOAD LOSS FACTOR EQUATION
COEFFICIENTS FOR SECTION VII.E.1.2.2 OF THIS APPENDIX A
Coefficients for induction motor and control part
load loss factor
(zi)
Motor horsepower
(hp)
a
≤5 .................................................................................................................................................
>5 and ≤20 ...................................................................................................................................
>20 and ≤50 .................................................................................................................................
>50 and ≤100 ...............................................................................................................................
>100 .............................................................................................................................................
b
¥0.0898
¥0.1591
¥0.4071
¥0.3341
¥0.0749
[FR Doc. 2023–05635 Filed 3–23–23; 8:45 am]
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Mar 23, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\24MRR2.SGM
24MRR2
c
1.0251
1.1683
1.4028
1.3377
1.0864
0.0667
¥0.0085
0.0055
¥0.0023
¥0.0096
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17934-17986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05635]
[[Page 17933]]
Vol. 88
Friday,
No. 57
March 24, 2023
Part II
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial and
Industrial Pumps; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 57 / Friday, March 24, 2023 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 17934]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032]
RIN 1904-AE53
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial and
Industrial Pumps
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the test procedure for commercial and
industrial pumps (``pumps'') to incorporate by reference relevant
portions of the latest version of the industry testing standard,
expands the scope of clean water pumps covered by this test procedure,
revises calculation methods for pumps sold with motors and controls to
better represent field energy use, adds and updates certain
definitions, and allows the use of alternative efficiency determination
methods for the rating and certification of pumps.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is April 24, 2023. The
amendments will be mandatory for product testing starting September 20,
2023.
The incorporation by reference of certain materials listed in the
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on April 24,
2023. The incorporation by reference of certain other materials listed
in this rule was approved by the Director of the Federal Register on
January 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov.
All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. However, not all documents listed in the index may be publicly
available, such as those containing information that is exempt from
public disclosure.
A link to the docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032. The docket web page contains instructions
on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the
docket.
For further information on how to review the docket contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by
email: [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-2J,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 586-9870. Email: [email protected].
Mr. Nolan Brickwood, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4498. Email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE incorporates by reference the following
industry standards into part 431:
HI 40.6-2021, ``Methods For Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing'';
ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017, ``Rotodynamic Pumps Guideline for NPSH Margin'';
ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016, ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump Piping'';
ANSI/HI 9.8-2018, ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump Intake Design'';
ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and
Definitions'';
HI Engineering Data Book--Second Edition;
Copies of HI 40.6-2021, ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017, ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016,
ANSI/HI 9.8-2018, ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, and the HI Engineering Data
Book--Second Edition, can be obtained from the Hydraulics Institute
(HI), 300 Interpace Parkway, 3rd Bldg. A Floor, Parsippany, NJ 07054,
(973) 267-9700, or online at: www.Pumps.org.
ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 2006), ``Measurement of Liquid Flow
in Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters'' (``ANSI/
ASME MFC-5M-1985'');
ASME MFC-3M-2004 (Reaffirmed 2017), ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in
Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi'' (``ASME MFC-3M-2004'');
ASME MFC-8M-2001 (Reaffirmed 2011), ``Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits:
Connections for Pressure Signal Transmissions Between Primary and
Secondary Devices'';
ASME MFC-12M-2006 (Reaffirmed 2014), ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in
Closed Conduits Using Multiport Averaging Pitot Primary Elements''
(``ASME MFC-12M-2006'');
ASME MFC-16-2014, ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits with
Electromagnetic Flowmeters'';
ASME MFC-22-2007 (Reaffirmed 2014), ``Measurement of Liquid by Turbine
Flowmeters'' (``ASME MFC-22-2007'');
Copies of ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-
2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, and ASME MFC-22-2007 can be
obtained from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Two
Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, (800) 843-2763, or online at:
www.asme.org.
ANSI/AWWA E103-2015, ``Horizontal and Vertical Line-Shaft Pumps''
(``AWWA E103-2015'');
Copies of AWWA E103-2015 can be obtained from the American Water
Works Association (AWWA), 6666 W Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (303)
794-7711, or online at: www.awwa.org.
CSA C390-10, ``Test methods, marking requirements, and energy
efficiency levels for three-phase induction motors'';
Copies of CSA C390-10 can be obtained from the Canadian Standards
Association (CSA), 178 Rexdale Blvd., Toronto, ON, Canada M9W 1R3,
(800) 463-6727, or online at www.csagroup.org.
IEEE 112-2017, ``IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction
Motors and Generators'';
IEEE 114-2010, ``IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Single-Phase
Induction Motors'';
Copies of IEEE 112-2017 and IEEE 114-2010 can be obtained from the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 445 Hoes
Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854-4141, (732) 981-0060, or online at
standards.ieee.org.
ISO 1438:2017(E), ``Hydrometry--Open channel flow measurement using
thin-plate weirs'' (``ISO 1438:2017'');
ISO 2186:2007(E), ``Fluid flow in closed conduits--Connections for
pressure signal transmissions between primary and secondary elements''
(``ISO 2186:2007'');
ISO 2715:2017(E), ``Liquid hydrocarbons--Volumetric measurement by
turbine flowmeter'' (``ISO 2715:2017'');
ISO 3354:2008(E), ``Measurement of clean water flow in closed
conduits--Velocity-area method using current-meters in full conduits
and under regular flow conditions'' (``ISO 3354:2008'');
ISO 3966:2020(E), ``Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits--
Velocity area method using Pitot static tubes'' (``ISO 3996:2020'');
ISO 5167-1:2003(E), ``Measurement of fluid flow by means of pressure
differential devices inserted in circular cross-section conduits
running full--Part 1: General
[[Page 17935]]
principles and requirements'' (``ISO 5167-1:2003'');
ISO 5198:1987(E), ``Centrifugal, mixed flow and axial pumps--Code for
hydraulic performance tests--Precision class'' (``ISO 5198:1987'');
ISO 6416:2017(E), ``Hydrometry--Measurement of discharge by the
ultrasonic transit time (time of flight) method'' (``ISO 6416:2017'');
ISO 20456:2017(E), ``Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits--
Guidance for the use of electromagnetic flowmeters for conductive
liquids'' (``ISO 20456:2017'');
Copies of ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017 can be obtained from the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO), Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401,
1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, or online at:
www.iso.org.
For a further discussion of these standards, see section IV.N of
this document.
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
A. Authority
B. Background
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Applicability
1. Pumps Not Designed for Clean Water Applications
2. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
3. Other Clean Water Pump Categories
4. Scope Limitations
B. Definitions
1. Removing Certain References to Volute
2. HI Pump Class References
3. Bowl Diameter
4. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
5. Between-Bearing Pumps
6. Vertical Turbine Pump
7. Radially-Split, Multi-Stage Horizontal Pumps
8. Close-Coupled and Mechanically-Coupled Pumps
C. Updates to Industry Standards
1. ANSI/HI 40.6
2. ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014
D. Metric
E. Amendments to Test Method
1. Nominal Speed
2. Testing of Multi-Stage Pumps
3. Load Profile
4. Pumps With BEP at Run-Out
5. Calibration of Measurement Equipment
6. Calculations and Rounding
F. Calculation-Based and Testing-Based Options According to Pump
Configuration (Table 1 of Appendix A)
1. Hybrid Mapping Approach
2. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Induction Motors and
Controls
3. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Inverter-Only Motors
(With or Without Controls)
4. Pumps Sold With Submersible Motors
G. Test Procedure for SVIL Pumps
1. Applicable Motor Regulations
2. SVIL Paired With Motors Less Than 0.25 Horsepower
3. SVIL Paired With Other Motors Not Covered by DOE Regulations
4. Part-Load Loss Curves
H. Test Procedure for Other Expanded Scope Pumps
1. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps to HI 40.6
2. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps With Motors
I. Sampling Plan, AEDMs, Enforcement Provisions, and Basic Model
1. Sampling Plan for Determining Represented Values
2. Alternative Efficiency Determination Methods
3. Enforcement Provisions
4. Basic Model Definition
J. Representations of Energy Use and Energy Efficiency
K. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
L. Compliance Date
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
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 Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Commercial and industrial pumps (collectively, ``pumps'') are
included in the list of ``covered equipment'' for which the U.S.
Department of Energy (``DOE'') is authorized to establish and amend
energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C.
6311(1)(A)) DOE's energy conservation standards and test procedures for
pumps are currently prescribed at title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (``CFR''), Sec. 431.464, and 10 CFR part 431 subpart Y
appendix A (``appendix A''). The following sections discuss DOE's
authority to establish test procedures for pumps and relevant
background information regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures
for this equipment.
A. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, as
amended (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency
of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA,\2\ established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This
equipment includes pumps, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C.
6311(1)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315),
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316; 42
U.S.C. 6296).
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1)
certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable
energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making other representations about
the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE
must use these test procedures to determine whether the equipment
complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6297). DOE may,
however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for particular State laws
or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other
[[Page 17936]]
provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D).
Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for
covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or
amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test
results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a given type of covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle (as determined by the Secretary) and
requires that test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including pumps, to
determine whether amended test procedures would more accurately or
fully comply with the requirements for the test procedures to not be
unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test
results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated
operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(1)
In addition, if the Secretary determines that a test procedure
amendment is warranted, the Secretary must publish proposed test
procedures in the Federal Register, and afford interested persons an
opportunity (of not less than 45 days' duration) to present oral and
written data, views, and arguments on the proposed test procedures. (42
U.S.C. 6314(b)). If DOE determines that test procedure revisions are
not appropriate, DOE must publish its determination not to amend the
test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))
DOE is publishing this final rule in satisfaction of the 7-year
review requirement specified in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)(1))
B. Background
DOE established its test procedure for pumps in a final rule
published on January 25, 2016. 81 FR 4086 (``January 2016 Final
Rule'').\3\ The January 2016 Final Rule established definitions for the
terms ``pump,'' \4\ ``driver,'' \5\ and ``controls,'' \6\ and
identified several categories and configurations of pumps. The pumps
test procedure currently incorporates by reference the Hydraulic
Institute (``HI'') Standard 40.6-2014, ``Methods for Rotodynamic Pump
Efficiency Testing'' (``HI 40.6-2014''), along with several
modifications to that testing method related to measuring the hydraulic
power, shaft power, and electric input power of pumps, inclusive of
electric motors and any continuous or non-continuous controls.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ On March 23, 2016, DOE published a correction to the January
2016 Final Rule to correct the placement of the product-specific
enforcement provisions related to pumps under 10 CFR 429.134(i). 81
FR 15426.
\4\ A ``pump'' means equipment designed to move liquids (which
may include entrained gases, free solids, and totally dissolved
solids) by physical or mechanical action and includes a bare pump
and, if included by the manufacturer at the time of sale, mechanical
equipment, driver, and controls. (10 CFR 431.462)
\5\ A ``driver'' provides mechanical input to drive a bare pump
directly or through the use of mechanical equipment. Electric
motors, internal combustion engines, and gas/steam turbines are
examples of drivers. (10 CFR 431.462)
\6\ A ``control'' is used to operate a driver. (10 CFR 431.462)
\7\ A ``continuous control'' is a control that adjusts the speed
of the pump driver continuously over the driver operating speed
range in response to incremental changes in the required pump flow,
head, or power output. A ``non-continuous control'' is a control
that adjusts the speed of a driver to one of a discrete number of
non-continuous preset operating speeds and does not respond to
incremental reductions in the required pump flow, head, or power
output. 10 CFR 431.462.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 28, 2020, DOE published an early assessment review
request for information (``RFI'') to determine whether to proceed with
a rulemaking to amend the test procedure for pumps. 85 FR 60734
(``September 2020 Early Assessment RFI''). DOE subsequently published
an RFI on April 16, 2021 seeking further data and information
pertaining to the test procedure for pumps. 86 FR 20075 (``April 2021
RFI''). On April 11, 2022, DOE published a test procedure notice of
proposed rulemaking presenting DOE's proposals to amend the pumps test
procedure. 87 FR 21268 (``April 2022 NOPR''). DOE held a public meeting
related to the April 2022 NOPR on April 26, 2022 (``NOPR public
meeting'').
DOE received comments in response to the April 2022 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.
Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the April 2022 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in this final Comment No. in
Commenter(s) rule the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Efficiency Advocates...... 30 Efficiency Organizations.
American Council for an Energy-
Efficient Economy, Natural Resources
Defense Council.
ebm-pabst, Inc.......................... ebm-pabst................. n/a Motor Manufacturer.
Grundfos Americas Corporation........... Grundfos.................. 31 Manufacturer.
Hydraulic Institute..................... HI........................ 33 Trade Association.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.... NEEA...................... 34 Efficiency Organization.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San CA IOUs................... 32 Utilities.
Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern
California Edison; collectively, the
California Investor-Owned Utilities.
People's Republic of China.............. China..................... 29 Country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\8\
To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments
that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided
during the NOPR public meeting, DOE cites the written comments
throughout this final rule. Any oral comments provided during the
webinar that are not substantively addressed by written comments are
summarized and cited separately throughout this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
test procedures for pumps. (Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032, which
is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged
as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number, page of that
document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
In this final rule, DOE amends Sec. Sec. 431.462, 431.463,
431.464, and appendix A as follows:
[[Page 17937]]
(1) Expand the scope of the test procedure to include additional
clean water pumps, specifically radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal
(``RSH'') pumps; radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal in-line
diffuser casing (``RSHIL'') pumps; radially-split, multi-stage,
horizontal, end-suction diffuser casing (``RSHES'') pumps; small
vertical in-line (``SVIL'') pumps; vertical turbine (``VT'') pumps;
pumps sold with 6-pole induction motors or motors with design speeds
greater than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm; and end-
suction pumps not covered by the current test procedure;
(2) Clarify the applicability of the design temperature range and
modify the range parameters;
(3) Add and modify certain definitions in 10 CFR 431.462 to
accommodate the expansion of the test procedure's scope and to clarify
existing definitions;
(4) Incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 into 10 CFR 431.463 and
remove language in the DOE test procedure that is redundant with HI
40.6-2021;
(5) Clarify certain test provisions for pumps with BEP at run-out;
(6) Update part-load loss factor equation coefficients in the
calculation method for pumps sold with induction motors and controls;
(7) Provide a calculation method for pumps sold with inverter-only
motors;
(8) Update the test procedure for submersible pumps to address
DOE's coverage of submersible motors;
(9) Add provisions for testing and rating RSH, SVIL, VT pumps, and
pumps sold with a 6-pole induction motors or with design speeds greater
than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm; and
(10) Allow use of alternative efficiency determination methods
(``AEDMs'').
The adopted amendments are summarized in Table II.1 compared to the
current test procedure provision prior to the amendment, as well as the
reason for the adopted change.
Table II.1--Summary of Changes in the Amended Test Procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE test procedure prior to
amendment Amended test procedure Attribution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not include in the scope Includes in the scope Improved
of the test procedure RSHIL, of the test procedure representativen
RSHES, SVIL, or VT pumps; RSHIL, RSHES, SVIL, ess.
pumps distributed in commerce and VT pumps; pumps
with nominal speeds of 1,200 distributed in
rpm; or all end-suction pumps. commerce with nominal
speeds of 1,200 rpm;
and all end-suction
pumps.
Includes a scope limitation of Specifies a scope Improved clarity
a design temperature range limitation of a pump and
from 14 to 248 [deg]F. whose design enforceability.
temperature range
falls wholly or
partially into the
range from 15 to 250
[deg]F.
Includes definitions for pump Includes definitions Required for
categories within the current for additional pump scope
scope of the test procedure. categories and expansion;
clarifications to the improved
definitions for some enforceability.
existing pump
categories.
Incorporates by reference HI Incorporates by Updates to
40.6-2014 for determining the reference HI 40.6- applicable
constant load pump energy 2021 for determining industry test
index (``PEICL'') and the the PEICL and the standard.
variable load pump energy PEIVL value of pumps.
index (``PEIVL'') value of
pumps.
Provides example pump Removes example pump Simplification
categories for certain pump categories from all of the test
definitions by referencing relevant definitions. procedure.
ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/
HI 2.1-2.2-2014.
References ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2- Incorporates a Simplification
2014 to define ``intermediate definition for of the test
bowl'' within the definition ``intermediate bowl'' procedure.
for bowl diameter. in the definition for
bowl diameter,
removing the
reference to ANSI/HI
2.1-2.2-2014.
Does not include test Includes Required for
provisions for multistage specifications for scope
pumps other than RSV and ST. stages for testing expansion.
for RSHIL, RSHES, and
VT pumps.
Includes provisions for pumps Clarifies provisions Improved
with BEP at run-out. for pumps with BEP at repeatability
run-out. and
reproducibility
.
References a section of HI Clarifies the Improved
40.6-2014 related to applicable test repeatability
calibration of measurement provisions in HI 40.6- and
equipment. 2021 for calibration reproducibility
of measurement .
equipment.
Includes a calculation method Includes revised part- Improved
for pumps sold with induction load loss factor representativen
motors and controls. equation coefficients ess.
for motors 50 hp and
above.
Does not provide a calculation Provides a calculation Reduced burden.
method for pumps sold with method for pumps sold
inverter-only motors. with inverter-only
motors.
Includes test provisions Includes test Allows for
specific to submersible pumps provisions specific seamless update
based on default motor to submersible pumps if or when DOE
efficiency. based on DOE's finalizes
coverage of submersible
submersible motors. motor coverage.
Does not include test Includes test Required for
provisions specific to SVILs. provisions specific scope
to SVILs. expansion.
Does not include provisions Includes provisions Improved
for testing pumps distributed for testing pumps representativen
in commerce with 6-pole sold with 6-pole ess.
motors or motors with design motors or motors with
speeds greater than or equal design speeds greater
to 960 rpm and less than than or equal to 960
1,440 rpm. rpm and less than
1,440 rpm.
Does not allow use of AEDMs... Allows use of AEDMs... Reduced burden.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 17938]]
DOE has determined that the amendments described in section III of
this final rule would not alter the measured efficiency \9\ of
commercial and industrial pumps that are currently included in the
scope of DOE's energy conservation standards for pumps. Therefore, DOE
does not expect that retesting or recertification would be necessary
for currently certified pumps as a result of DOE's adoption of the
amendments to the test procedures. Additionally, DOE has determined
that the amendments would not increase the cost of testing for these
pumps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ DOE is updating the induction motor coefficients (see
section III.F.2 of this document) which will change the calculated
rating for pumps sold with induction motors. However, DOE expects
the updated calculations will provide a PEI equal to or less than
that determined using the current induction motor coefficients.
Since the pump would be considered more efficient, manufacturers
would not have to recertify their basic models, although they could
voluntarily choose to do so. As such, DOE has determined that the
updated induction motor coefficients will not increase manufacturer
burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For pumps that are not currently within the scope of the test
procedure but are subject to the expansion of scope adopted by this
final rule, use of the DOE test procedure as amended by this final rule
is not required until the compliance date of any energy conservation
standards that DOE may ultimately establish for such pumps as part of a
separate rulemaking assessing the technological feasibility and
economic justification for such standards.
The effective date for the amended test procedures adopted in this
final rule is 30 days after publication of this document in the Federal
Register. Representations of energy use or energy efficiency must be
based on testing in accordance with the amended test procedures
beginning 180 days after the publication of this final rule. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d))
Discussion of DOE's actions are addressed in detail in section III
of this final rule.
III. Discussion
A. Scope of Applicability
The current DOE test procedure for pumps applies to five categories
of ``clean water pumps'' with specific defined characteristics and
excludes certain defined categories \10\ of pumps. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The excluded categories of pumps are fire pumps; self-
priming pumps; prime-assist pumps; magnet driven pumps; pumps
designed to be used in a nuclear facility subject to 10 CFR part 50,
``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities''; and
pumps meeting the design and construction requirements set forth in
Military Specifications: MIL-P-17639F, ``Pumps, Centrifugal,
Miscellaneous Service, Naval Shipboard Use'' (as amended); MIL-P-
17881D, ``Pumps, Centrifugal, Boiler Feed, (Multi-Stage)'' (as
amended); MIL-P-17840C, ``Pumps, Centrifugal, Close-Coupled, Navy
Standard (For Surface Ship Application)'' (as amended); MIL-P-
18682D, ``Pump, Centrifugal, Main Condenser Circulating, Naval
Shipboard'' (as amended); and MIL-P-18472G, ``Pumps, Centrifugal,
Condensate, Feed Booster, Waste Heat Boiler, And Distilling Plant''
(as amended). 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE defines ``clean water pump'' as a pump that is designed for use
in pumping water with a maximum non-absorbent free solid content of
0.016 pounds per cubic foot, and with a maximum dissolved solid content
of 3.1 pounds per cubic foot, provided that the total gas content of
the water does not exceed the saturation volume and disregarding any
additives necessary to prevent the water from freezing at a minimum of
14 [deg]F. 10 CFR 431.462.
The five categories of clean water pumps to which the current test
procedure applies are: end-suction close-coupled (``ESCC''); end-
suction frame mounted/own bearings (``ESFM''); in-line (``IL'');
radially-split, multi-stage, vertical, in-line diffuser casing
(``RSV''); and submersible turbine (``ST''). 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i).
The defined characteristics specify limits on flow rate, maximum head,
design temperature range, motor type, bowl diameter, and speed.\11\ 10
CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii). In the context of the energy conservation
standards, pumps are further delineated into equipment classes based on
nominal speed of rotation and operating mode (i.e., constant load or
variable load). 10 CFR 431.465.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ More specifically, these characteristics include: (A) flow
rate of 25 gallons per minute or greater at best efficiency point
(``BEP'') and full impeller diameter; (B) maximum head of 459 feet
at BEP and full impeller diameter and the number of stages required
for testing; (C) design temperature range from 14 to 248 [deg]F; (D)
designed to operate with either (1) a 2- or 4-pole induction motor,
or (2) a non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating
range that includes speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320
revolutions per minute (``rpm'') and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm, and in
either case, the driver and impeller must rotate at the same speed;
(E) For ST pumps, a 6-inch or smaller bowl diameter; and (F) For
ESCC and ESFM pumps, a specific speed less than or equal to 5,000
when calculated using U.S. customary units. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed expanding the test procedure
scope to include BB, RSH, RSHIL, RSHES, SVIL, and VT pumps, as well as
pumps sold with 6-pole induction motors or motors with design speeds
between 960 rpm and 1,440 rpm; ST pumps with bowl diameters greater
than 6 inches; and end-suction pumps not covered by the current test
procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21272.
The CA IOUs, Efficiency Advocates, and NEEA supported DOE's
proposal to expand the test procedure scope to include additional
pumps. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 1-3;
CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 1) NEEA commented that sales reported to its
commercial and industrial pumps efficiency program indicated these
pumps should be included in the scope of the test procedure and that
this would avoid pumps outside the scope from competing with regulated
pumps without the costs of complying with the efficiency standards and
labeling requirements. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2)
HI stated that the proposed scope expansion could be tested to HI
40.6-2021 but commented that DOE should consider the benefits of
including larger pumps, since these pumps are often sold in much
smaller volumes and the capital and manufacturing impacts will be
disproportionate compared to energy savings for the current scope. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 1) HI also stated that these larger pumps may require
different testing infrastructure and instrumentation and that this
would require substantial capital investment for testing. Id.
DOE addresses HI's comments in the following sections relative to
specific pump categories. The following sections also provide
additional information and responses to stakeholder comments specific
to the pumps that DOE considered for inclusion in the test procedure
scope.
1. Pumps Not Designed for Clean Water Applications
The scope of the current DOE test procedure, as described
previously, does not include either chemical process or wastewater
pumps. See 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i). Chemical process pumps are designed
to pump fluids other than water, and wastewater pumps are designed for
water with a higher level of free solids than clean water pumps. In the
April 2022 NOPR, in response to comments received on the April 2021
RFI, DOE explained that although certain non-clean water pumps may be
used in clean water applications, DOE expects the number of non-clean
water pumps used in the clean water applications to be relatively
small. 87 FR 21268, 21275. DOE noted that the relevant industry
standards do not provide requirements for testing pumps designed for
non-clean water applications. Id. To test non-clean water pumps, DOE
would need to reference or develop an alternate test procedure. Id.
While this test procedure might enable comparison between non-clean
water pumps, it is unlikely that a clean water and non-clean water test
procedure would provide comparable results. Id.
[[Page 17939]]
Additionally, DOE noted that non-clean water pumps, specifically
wastewater pumps, must meet specific performance requirements to ensure
the health of the U.S. population. 87 FR 21268, 21275. DOE would need
to carefully evaluate how the performance of non-clean water pumps
could be impacted by energy conservation standards and ensure that
public health and safety would not be negatively affected. Id. As such,
additional investigation would be needed to understand the market,
energy savings potential, test procedure implications, and performance
requirements of non-clean water pumps (i.e., chemical process and
wastewater). Id. DOE noted that because ``C-value'' is specified in the
energy conservation standard (see 10 CFR 431.465(b)(4)) and C-value is
required for determining PEICL and PEIVL, there
would be limited use of the test procedure without corresponding
standards. Id. Therefore, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively
determined to continue to limit the applicability of the test procedure
to clean water pumps. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, NEEA requested that DOE add
ASME B73 \12\ compliant pumps in the clean water definition. (NEEA, No.
34 at p. 2-4) NEEA explained that pumps that meet the requirements of
ANSI/ASME Standard B73.1-2012 or ANSI/ASME B73.2-2002 are often used in
pumping clean water. Id. NEEA further stated that these pumps are often
advertised as serving clean water functions and have been certified for
that end use--some for drinking water components. Since these pumps
overlap and compete directly with covered pumps in clean water
applications, NEEA argued that they potentially create a compliance
loophole. Id. NEEA suggested that DOE no longer consider ASME B73
certified pumps to be excluded from the clean water definition and
clarified that they did not believe DOE would need to change the
current or proposed scope of pumps to do so. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4)
NEEA stated that ending the exclusion was sufficient, and that in doing
so DOE would only be including those ASME B73 certified pumps that
advertise as clean water pumps and compete directly with clean water
pumps. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Pumps certified under the ASME B73 designation include:
B73.1 (``Specification for Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps
for Chemical Process''), B73.2 (``Specification for Vertical In-Line
Centrifugal Pumps for Chemical Process''), B73.3 (``Specification
for Sealless Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps for Chemical
Process''), and B73.5 (``Thermoplastic/thermoset Polymer Material
Horizontal End-suction Centrifugal Pumps Chemical Process''). All
B73 pumps are designed for use as chemical process pumps, which have
specific design requirements related to reliability and performance
such as maximum shaft deflections, bearing frame lubrication,
sealing requirements, and vibration limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to NEEA, any pump designed for non-clean water
applications would also be capable of pumping clean water. However, DOE
notes that the definition of clean water pump specifies that the pump
is designed for use in pumping [clean water] (emphasis added). See 10
CFR 431.462. DOE further notes that the ASME B73 pumps have additional
design requirements for maximum shaft deflections, bearing frame
lubrication, sealing, and vibration limits because they are designed
for use in chemical process applications.
Because of the additional design requirements applicable to ASME
B73 pumps, it is unlikely that a manufacturer of clean water pumps
would certify to ASME B73 as a way to avoid DOE energy conservation
standards. DOE market research indicates that the prices of ASME B73
pumps are typically substantially higher than the clean water pumps
that are included in this rulemaking, presumably due to these
additional design requirements. Therefore, DOE does not expect end
users to specifically purchase ASME B73 pumps for use as replacements
for clean water pumps currently covered by DOE energy conservation
standards. Finally, DOE is not aware of ASME B73 pumps being
distributed in commerce as substitutes for clean water pumps to any
significant degree. Given these considerations, DOE is not amending the
definition of clean water pump to specifically include pumps certified
under the ASME B73 designation in this rulemaking.
The Efficiency Advocates encouraged DOE to investigate ways to
accelerate adoption of variable speed drives (``VSDs'') in nonclean
water applications, stating that pumps in chemical and wastewater
sectors are estimated to use more than 27 and 17 TWh/yr of electricity
respectively. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 4) They cited a 2020
study by NEEA showing that VSDs provided average energy savings of 23
percent and 43 percent for constant- and variable-load clean water
pumping applications, respectively. Id. The Efficiency Advocates
concluded from this study that there are significant potential savings
from using VSDs, noting that wastewater flow can vary significantly
over time and may benefit especially. Id. Efficiency Advocates
encouraged DOE to develop the test procedure for VSDs in non-clean
water applications in order to facilitate greater market adoption of
VSDs in wastewater and chemical process pumps and capture the potential
energy-savings benefits.
In response to the Efficiency Advocates, DOE reiterates its
discussion in the April 2022 NOPR that DOE expects the number of non-
clean water pumps used in the clean water applications to be relatively
small; that the scope of HI 40.6-2014, which is currently incorporated
by reference into the DOE test procedure, includes clean water pumps
only, and that it is unlikely that a clean water and non-clean water
test procedure would provide comparable results. 87 FR 21268, 21275.
DOE emphasizes that waste water pumps, in particular, are required to
pump slurries/solids. DOE is incorporating by reference HI 40.6-2021,
which is only applicable to clean water pumps. If DOE were to include
waste water and other clean water pumps in its scope of coverage, it
would need to evaluate the applicability and repeatability of industry
test procedures for these pumps. DOE has not had an opportunity to
appropriately evaluate these test procedures or conduct its own testing
on non-clean water pumps during this test procedure rulemaking;
however, DOE may consider evaluating these pumps in a future
rulemaking.
In summary, the scope of the test procedure as amended by this
final rule continues to exclude both chemical process and wastewater
pumps.
Regarding VSDs, DOE notes that its current test procedure
accommodates pumps with variable speed operation by providing
calculations for determining variable load PEI (``PEIVL'').
(See Appendix A to subpart Y of part 431.) However, as discussed, DOE
is continuing to exclude wastewater pumps from the scope of the test
procedure.
2. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
As discussed, the scope of the current DOE test procedure is
limited to five categories of pumps designed for clean water
applications. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i). One of these categories is IL
pumps, which are limited to a shaft input power greater than or equal
to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at best efficiency point
(``BEP'') \13\ and full impeller diameter, and in which liquid is
discharged in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft. 10 CFR
431.462. In 2016, a Circulator Pump Working Group \14\ recommended a
test procedure
[[Page 17940]]
and energy conservation standard for circulator pumps, which DOE is
addressing in a separate rulemaking, and also made recommendations for
SVIL pumps. SVIL pumps have characteristics identical to those for in-
line pumps except SVIL pumps have shaft input power of less than 1 hp.
The Circulator Pump Working Group recommended that (1) SVIL pumps be
evaluated using the PEICL or PEIVL metric, and
(2) SVIL pumps should be tested using the DOE commercial and industrial
pump test procedure, with any needed modifications determined by DOE.
(Docket No. EERE-2016-BT-STD-0004, No. 58 Recommendation #1B at pp. 1-
2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ BEP is the pump hydraulic power operating point (consisting
of both flow and head conditions) that results in the maximum
efficiency.
\14\ On February 3, 2016, DOE published its intention to
establish a working group under the Appliance Standards and
Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (``ASRAC'') to negotiate a
test procedure and energy conservation standards for circulator
pumps. 81 FR 5658. Throughout this document, this working group is
referred to as the ``Circulator Pump Working Group''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 2022 NOPR, consistent with the Circulator Pump Working
Group recommendation, DOE proposed to include SVIL pumps in the pump
test procedure scope as an extension of IL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21275-
21276. DOE tentatively determined that SVIL pumps can be tested using
the current DOE pumps test procedure with certain additional
modifications. The metric and test procedure for SVIL pumps are
discussed in sections III.D and III.G of this notice. Moreover, DOE
stated in the April 2022 NOPR that it expects that including SVIL pumps
in the pumps test procedure would reduce confusion over which inline
pumps are and are not subject to energy conservation standards. Id. DOE
requested comment on its proposal to expand the scope of the test
procedure to cover SVIL pumps.
HI, NEEA, the CA IOUs, and the Efficiency Advocates agreed with
including SVIL pumps in the scope of the test procedure, and Grundfos
agreed that SVILs should be an extension of IL pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p.
2; NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4; CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates,
No. 30 at pp. 2-3; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1) Grundfos also commented
that it sells a small number of SVIL pumps without a motor, but it does
not believe that SVILs sold without motors should be excluded from the
regulation. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
Due to the overlap between SVILs and circulators, NEEA and the CA
IOUs expressed support for the development of standards to ensure that
efficiencies of both are comparable. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 4; CA IOUs,
No. 32 at p. 2) NEEA stated their finding that 12 percent of IL pumps
(excluding circulator pumps) are less than 1 hp, and that SVILs are
therefore an important and overlapping segment of the market. (NEEA,
No. 34 at p. 4) NEEA stated that it believes broadening the scope to
include SVILs will help to avoid market confusion or gaps in coverage.
Id.
For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs and in the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE is finalizing its proposal to include SVILs in the
scope of the test procedure. DOE finalizes a definition for SVIL pumps
in section III.B.4 of this document. In response to Grundfos' comment,
DOE's finalized test procedure, as discussed in section III.G, incudes
methods to test SVILs both with and without motors. DOE will address
the development of standards separately in the ongoing pumps energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
3. Other Clean Water Pump Categories
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to expand the current test
procedure's scope to include additional clean water pumps. 87 FR 21268,
21276-21279. The following sections discuss DOE's consideration of
additional pump categories in the scope of the test procedure.
a. Between-Bearing Pumps
Section 1.2.9.2 of ANSI-HI 14.1-14.2-2019 describes between-bearing
pumps as pumps that are one- or two-stage, axially-split, mounted to a
baseplate, driven by a motor via a flexible coupling, and with bearings
on both ends of the rotating assembly.
Based on a review of the market, BB pumps are generally larger than
the pumps currently subject to the DOE test procedure. Many BB pumps
exceed the head and horsepower limits in the current DOE test
procedure. Additionally, BB pumps are not typically designed for clean
water applications. Despite these generalities, DOE has identified
certain clean water BB pumps under 200 hp and 459 feet of head that
could be viewed as potentially interchangeable with pumps that are
currently included in the scope of the current DOE test procedure.
To address the potential for pumps that provide unregulated
alternatives to the pumps currently subject to the DOE test procedure,
DOE proposed to include BB pumps within the scope of the DOE test
procedure in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21277. However, DOE did
not propose to expand scope beyond clean water pumps, and did not
propose to expand the head or horsepower limitations currently listed
in 10 CFR 431.464(1)(ii). Id. DOE noted that while many BB pumps exceed
the test procedure's head or horsepower limitations, an expansion of
the current head and horsepower restrictions has the potential to
increase test burden by requiring larger laboratory equipment to test
pumps according to the DOE test procedure and most of the larger BB
pumps were not designed for clean water. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the CA IOUs, the Efficiency
Advocates, and Grundfos supported DOE's proposal to expand the test
procedure scope to include BB pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3;
Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-3; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1) The
CA IOUs commented that BB pumps are high-cost, low-sale pumps and that
they anticipate BB pumps will be larger, with motor horsepower of 100
or over. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) The CA IOUs also cited industry
literature indicating that efficiency can be improved by balancing the
impeller forces in BB pumps. Id.
HI disagreed that BB1 \15\ pumps are commercially acceptable
replacements for currently regulated pumps due to design and cost
considerations. (HI, No. 33 at p. 2) HI stated that the price for a BB1
pump compared to a currently regulated pump would be two times or more.
Id. Despite supporting DOE's proposal to include BB pumps in the test
procedure scope, Grundfos stated that it expects testing these pumps
will increase test burden because of their large size, larger motor
sizes required for test, and the potential for additional test
fixtures. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ BB1 pumps are a pump class defined by HI 14.1-14.2-2019
that are 1 and 2 stage, axially-split pumps with the impeller(s)
mounted between bearings at either end. BB1 pumps are a specific
sub-category of BB pumps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on stake holder comments, feedback from manufacturer
interviews, and additional reviews of product literature, DOE has
determined that BB pumps do not serve as replacements for pumps
currently covered by the DOE test procedure. For a given load point, a
BB pump will be larger, heavier, and more expensive than an equivalent
end suction pump. Therefore, it is making it very unlikely that
customers would choose to replace a regulated end suction pump with an
unregulated BB pump. Additionally, DOE has determined that
manufacturers of BB pumps would likely need to build new test stands to
test their BB products using the DOE test procedure. DOE notes that
because most BB pumps are outside of the DOE test procedure scope, due
to their flow and head exceeding the maximum flow and head set by DOE.
Therefore, if DOE were to include BB pumps in this test procedure, BB
pump manufacturers would need to make substantial capital investments
to test and certify a very small number of
[[Page 17941]]
pumps. This would result in a test cost per basic model that is as much
as 100 times higher than DOE's estimate presented in the April 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21309. Test costs are discussed in more detail in
section III.K.1. Since customers are not expected to use BB pumps as
replacements for end suction pumps and test burden for BB pump
manufacturers would be very high relative to the number of pumps
tested, DOE has determined that the potential benefits of including BB
pumps within the scope of this test procedure are outweighed by the
burdens associated with testing and certifying such products. As such,
in this final rule DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of
this test procedure.
b. Vertical Turbine Pumps
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined
that ST pumps and VT pumps have similar end uses. 87 FR 21268, 21277.
Additionally, DOE tentatively determined that ST and VT pumps have
similar bowl and impeller assemblies, and that VT pumps may even share
an identical assembly with an ST pump produced by the same
manufacturer. Id. To address the potential for pumps that provide
unregulated alternatives to the pumps currently subject to the DOE test
procedure, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to include VT pumps,
with no limit on bowl diameter for inclusion in the DOE test procedure.
Id.
In response to DOE's proposal in the April 2022 NOPR, the
Efficiency Advocates expressed support for DOE's scope expansion to
cover VT pumps. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-3) The CA IOUs
commended DOE for including VT pumps and asserted that regulating
equipment used for accessing groundwater in irrigation applications is
important because at least 30 percent of the wells in Texas and
California use VT pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 2)
HI stated that expanding the test procedure scope to include VT
pumps would add a substantial burden for manufacturers who will have to
test low-speed and large-diameter pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3) HI
continued by stating that these large-diameter VT pumps may be
assembled and tested on site, and that manufacturers may or may not
have the capacity to test VT pumps in their test facilities. Id.
DOE is finalizing its proposal to include VT pumps in the pumps
test procedure scope. However, DOE is not adopting its proposal to
include these pumps without a limit on bowl diameter, and is instead
limiting the scope of VT pumps to bowl diameters less than or equal to
six inches, consistent with the existing test procedure and energy
conservation standards size limitation for ST pumps. HI indicated that
expanding bowl diameter to greater than 6 inches for VT and ST pumps
may have a significant impact on manufacturer test burden. DOE expects
test time and cost for VT pumps with bowl diameters less than or equal
to 6 inches is equivalent to that for ST pumps with bowl diameters less
than or equal to 6 inches because of the similar physical
characteristics and hydraulic properties for these pump classes. DOE's
determination to exclude VT and ST pumps with bowl diameters greater
than 6 inches is discussed in more detail in section III.A.4.a. of this
document.
Based on its review of pump literature and pump schematics, DOE has
determined that the current DOE test procedure based on HI 40.6-2021 is
applicable to VT pumps and that therefore VT pumps can be easily added
to the scope of the DOE test procedure. In addition, including
provisions for VT pumps in the DOE test procedure will give consumers
the ability to easily compare the efficiency of different VT and ST
pump models serving similar applications. Lastly, creating a uniform
test procedure and rating method for VT pumps will enable DOE to
consider establishing energy conservation standards for these pumps.
The definition for VT pumps is discussed in section III.B.6 of this
document. DOE addresses the question of test burden in section
III.K.1.a. of this document.
c. Radially-Split Multi-Stage Horizontal Pumps
The current DOE test procedure includes RSV pumps, but does not
include RSH pumps, which are also multistage pumps used primarily in
heating, cooling, and pressure boosting applications.
DOE has surveyed pump and end-product materials and literature
available online and has concluded that RSV and RSH pumps are marketed
for similar applications, and that RSH pumps could be substituted for
RSV pumps and may provide a regulatory loophole to RSV pumps.
Additionally, DOE determined that RSH pumps can be tested using the
current DOE test procedure. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to
include RSH pumps with both in-line (``RSHIL'') and end-suction
(``RSHES'') flow configurations in its test procedure scope. 87 FR
21268, 21278.
In response to the proposal to include RSH pumps in the test
procedure scope, Grundfos stated that it agrees with adding RSHES pumps
to the scope but requested additional information regarding which
products meet the definitions and whether they should be considered
under a single pump category. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2) The Efficiency
Advocates supported DOE expanding its test procedure scope to include
RSHIL and RSHES configurations. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-
3) HI commented that the addition of RSH pumps will add manufacturer
test burden. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3)
DOE has determined that the current DOE test procedure based on HI
40.6-2021 is applicable to RSH pumps, and that therefore RSH pumps can
be easily added to the scope of the DOE test procedure. In addition,
including provisions for RSH pumps in the DOE test procedure will give
consumers the ability to easily compare the efficiency of different RSH
and RSV pump models. Lastly, creating a uniform test procedure and
rating method for RSH pumps will enable DOE to consider establishing
energy conservation standards for these pumps. DOE is finalizing its
proposal to include RSH pumps, specifically RSHIL and RSHES pumps, in
the scope of the DOE test procedure. Definitions for RSH, RSHES, and
RSHIL are discussed in section III.B.7 of this document. DOE addresses
the question of test burden in section III.K.1.a. of this document.
d. End-Suction Pumps Similar to ESFM and ESCC Pumps
DOE defines a ``close-coupled pump'' as a pump having a motor shaft
that also serves as the impeller shaft, and defines a ``mechanically-
coupled pump'' as a pump that has its own impeller shaft and bearings
separate from the motor shaft. 10 CFR 431.462. As discussed in the
April 2021 RFI, DOE is aware that certain pumps may have their own
shaft, but with no bearings to support that shaft. 86 FR 20075, 20078.
Additionally, while the close-coupled pump definition describes a pump
in which the motor shaft also serves as the pump shaft, the definition
does not provide detail on how the motor and pump shaft may be
connected. DOE has observed that some manufacturers describe close-
coupled pumps as using an adapter to mount the impeller directly to the
motor shaft. The coupling type is the only differentiator between ESCC
pumps, which are ``close-coupled pumps,'' and ESFM pumps, which are
``mechanically-coupled pumps.'' In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE
noted that it intended for ESFM and ESCC pumps to be mutually exclusive
to ensure that pumps that are close-coupled to the motor and have a
single impeller and
[[Page 17942]]
motor shaft would be part of the ESCC equipment category, while all
other end-suction pumps that are mechanically-coupled to the motor and
for which the bare pump and motor have separate shafts would be part of
the ESFM equipment category. 81 FR 4086, 4096. Despite this intention,
DOE is aware that these definitions may have excluded some end-suction
pumps from the test procedure scope.
In the April 2022 NOPR, based on comment responses from the April
2021 RFI and DOE's review of ESCC and ESFM pumps, DOE tentatively
determined that there is a group of end-suction pumps that do not
currently fall into either the ESFM or ESCC definition, but which may
be competitors to the currently regulated pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21278.
Therefore, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to ensure that all
clean water end-suction pumps are covered by the test procedure by
revising the definitions of ESFM and ESCC pumps. Id. DOE tentatively
determined that no test procedure revisions would be needed to
accommodate these additional end-suction pumps. Id.
In response to DOE's proposal in the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos and
the Efficiency Advocates expressed support for revising the ESFM and
ESCC definitions to include additional end-suction pumps. (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 2; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 2-3)
For the reasons discussed in the April 2022 NOPR and in the
preceding paragraphs, DOE is including all end-suction pumps within the
coverage of this test procedure by modifying the definitions of ESFM
and ESCC pumps.
e. Line Shaft and Cantilever Pumps
ANSI/HI Standard 14.1-14.2-2019, ``American National Standard for
Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and Definitions'' (ANSI/HI 14.1-
14.2-2019'') includes design criteria for different pump
configurations, and section 14.1.3.3.1.3 describes vertically separate
discharge sump pumps, a category of pump that includes line shaft
(``VS4'') pumps and cantilever (``VS5'') pumps. Both VS4 and VS5 pumps
are vertically-suspended pumps with a single casing and with a
discharge column that is separate from the shaft column. The pump
equipment categories defined by DOE do not explicitly reference VS4 or
VS5 pumps, and some pumps may be covered by both the DOE definition of
an ESFM pump and the HI definition of a VS4 or VS5 pump. 86 FR 20075,
20079.
DOE addressed comments on the April 2021 RFI regarding these pumps
in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21278. DOE discussed that some
line shaft pumps may already be within the test procedure scope but are
defined as ESFM pumps. Id. Additionally, DOE noted that cantilever
pumps are primarily designed for non-clean water applications,
including liquids and slurries containing large solids. Id. DOE did not
propose to include line shaft or cantilever pumps in the test procedure
scope in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21279.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the Efficiency Advocates
further encouraged DOE to consider coverage for both cantilever and
line shaft pumps, stating that some of these pumps have similar designs
to ESFM and ESCC pumps and some are marketed for pumping clean water.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at pp. 3-4)
DOE notes that most or all clean water line shaft and cantilever
pumps are already covered by the ES definition. DOE does not believe
there is a significant amount of clean water cantilever and line shaft
pumps, as these pumps are primarily designed for non-clean water
applications including liquids and slurries that contain large solids.
As discussed, DOE is not expanding the scope to include non-clear water
pumps.
4. Scope Limitations
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also proposed to remove bowl diameter
limitations for certain pumps, include an additional nominal speed of
1200 rpm, and decrease horsepower requirements for IL pumps. 87 FR
21268, 21279. DOE also proposed to clarify pump design temperature
range. Id. The following sections summarize each of these topics.
a. Submersible Turbine Pumps With Bowl Diameter Greater Than 6 Inches
As discussed previously, the scope of the current DOE test
procedure includes ST pumps with a bowl diameter of 6 inches or
smaller. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i)(E) and (a)(1)(ii)(E).
DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to include VT pumps within the
scope of the DOE test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21279. DOE did not
propose a bowl diameter limitation for VT pumps in the April 2022 NOPR.
VT pumps are similar in design to ST pumps and commenters had indicated
that the two pump categories can be used in overlapping applications.
Id. Therefore, to maintain consistency across VT and ST pump
categories, DOE also proposed to remove the 6-inch bowl diameter
limitation for ST pumps. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the CA IOUs and the Efficiency
Advocates supported including ST pumps with a bowl diameter greater
than six inches. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30
at p. 3) The CA IOUs also provided supplemental data to support the
inclusion of ST pumps with bowl diameters greater than six inches. (CA
IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3-5, 7) They found that 21 percent of California
wells, and 36 percent of Texas wells had an estimated nominal bowl size
between eight and twelve inches. Id. at 5.
China recommended that DOE retain the 6-inch maximum bowl diameter
restriction for ST pumps to avoid the high cost of testing larger ST
pumps. (China, No. 29 at p. 4)
Grundfos stated that all of its products with bowl diameters
greater than 6 inches would be excluded from the regulation due to the
head limitation (i.e., less than or equal to 459 feet); however, it
commented that increasing the maximum bowl diameter would have minimal
impact on energy use and suggested that DOE instead evaluate how ST
pumps with larger bowl diameters may be evaluated in a future
rulemaking. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2)
HI encouraged DOE to define how bowl size would be determined for a
ST pump when the bowl diameter varies among stages. (HI, No. 33 at p.
4) HI also stated that since DOE has proposed to expand the size of ST
pumps and include all sizes of VT pumps, DOE should clarify that its
scope is limited to a specific speed of 5,000 in U.S. customary units
for these pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 1) Additionally, HI recommended that
DOE update the text in 431.464 (a)(1)(iii)(E) as follows: For ST, VT,
ESCC and ESFM pumps, a specific speed less than or equal to 5,000 when
calculated using U.S. customary units. Id.
In response to HI's comment on determining bowl size when bowl
diameter varies between stages, DOE clarifies that where bowl diameter
varies among stages, the minimum bowl diameter of a ST or VT pump would
be considered the appropriate measurement.
Based on additional evaluation and the feedback it received from
stakeholders, DOE has determined that manufacturers of VT and ST pumps
with bowl diameters larger then 6 inches would likely need to build new
test stands to test these products using the DOE test procedure. DOE
notes that because many VT and ST pumps with bowl diameters larger then
6 inches are outside of the DOE test procedure scope because their head
exceeds the
[[Page 17943]]
maximum set by DOE. Therefore, if DOE were to include these pumps in
its test procedure, pump manufacturers would need to make substantial
capital investments to test and certify a very small number of in-scope
pumps. This would result in a test cost per basic model that is as much
as 100 times higher than the estimates DOE presented in the April 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21309. Test costs are discussed in more details in
section III.K.1 of this document. Since test burden for VT and ST pump
manufacturers would be very high relative to the number of pumps
tested, DOE has determined that the potential benefits of including VT
and ST pumps with bowl diameters larger than 6 inches within the scope
of this test procedure are outweighed by the burdens associated with
testing and certifying such products. Therefore, DOE is maintaining the
6-inch bowl diameter limitation for ST pumps and specifying a maximum
bowl diameter of 6 inches for VT pumps in this final rule.
b. Pumps Designed To Be Operated at 1,200 RPM
As discussed, DOE limits the scope of pumps under the current test
procedure to those designed to operate with a 2- or 4-pole induction
motor, or a non-induction motor with an operating range that includes
speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 rpm and/or 1,440 and 2,160
rpm. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). In either case, the driver and
impeller must rotate at the same speed. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D).
The current DOE test procedure does not include pumps designed to
operate with 6-pole induction motors, or with non-induction motors that
have a speed-of-rotation operating range exclusively outside the ranges
defined.
Based on a review of pump performance curves available online, DOE
found that unregulated pumps tested with a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm
are often part of the same pump families as those pumps that currently
fall within the scope of the DOE test procedure.\16\ 87 FR 21268,
21279. To ensure equitable treatment among these pumps, DOE proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR to extend the scope of this test procedure to cover
pumps designed to operate with 6-pole induction motors, and pumps
designed to operate with non-induction motors with an operating range
that includes speeds of rotation between 960 rpm and 1,440 rpm.\17\ Id.
DOE proposed test provisions to accommodate these pumps in the April
2022 NOPR and requested comment on its proposal. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032-0024.
(Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-TP-0032-0024.)
\17\ 960 and 1440 rpm are 20 percent of 1,200 rpm.
The acceptable non-induction motor ranges for 1800 and 3600 rpm
pumps are also 20 percent of the nominal value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the CA IOUs and the Efficiency
Advocates supported DOE including 6-pole motors. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p.
3; Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p. 3) The CA IOUs stated that 6-pole
clean water pumps often have operating ranges that compete with 4-pole
pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3) Grundfos agreed that 6[hyphen]pole
pumps should be considered but questioned whether doing so would
achieve the energy savings that DOE anticipates, and observed that 6-
pole pumps have much smaller sales numbers compared to less expensive
4[hyphen]pole pumps for a similar duty point. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
5).
After review of stakeholder feedback, and for the reasons discussed
above, DOE is extending the scope of this test procedure to cover pumps
designed to operate with 6-pole induction motors. DOE may evaluate
potential energy savings for these pumps in a future energy
conservation standard.
In terms of operating range, Grundfos urged DOE to ensure that the
operating ranges for 6-pole and 4-pole pumps designed to operate with
non-induction motors are independent from each other. Grundfos
additionally recommended setting the maximum operating range for
6[hyphen]pole pumps designed to operate with non-induction motors at
1,439 rpm since the lower end of the operating range is 1,440 rpm for
4[hyphen]pole pumps designed to operate with non-induction motors.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2, 5) Similarly, HI recommended that DOE change
the maximum operating speed for 6-pole pumps designed to operate with
non-induction motors from 1,440 rpm to 1,439 rpm to provide a clear
delineation between the operating range for 4-pole pumps designed to
operate with non-induction motors (i.e., 1,440 rpm to 2,160 rpm). (HI,
No. 33 at p. 5)
DOE agrees that the operating ranges for 2-, 4-, and 6-pole pumps
designed to operate with a non-induction motor should be separate from
each other and not overlap. In consideration of stakeholder feedback,
DOE is modifying the maximum operating speed for a 6-pole pump designed
to operate with a non-induction motor from 960 rpm to 1,400 rpm as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to greater than or equal to 960 rpm and
less than 1,440 rpm. In summary, in this final rule, DOE is including
clean water pumps designed to operate with a 6-pole induction motor or
a non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating range greater
than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm.
Grundfos also commented that adding the 6[hyphen]pole speed
highlights a point of unnecessary testing burden around the defined
``operating ranges'' with respect to variable speed equipment.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 2) According to Grundfos, a variable speed
product with a motor designed for 4,000 rpm can technically operate at
speeds across all three defined ``ranges,'' and current regulations
require testing at all three nominal speeds. Id. However, Grundfos
stated that a product with a 4,000 rpm design speed will likely perform
only in a single operating range defined by DOE. Id. Grundfos asserted
that consumers are more likely to purchase a less expensive pump with a
smaller horsepower range than run a 4,000 rpm pump at 1,800 rpm. Id.
Therefore, Grundfos recommended the DOE consider updating its language
to state that variable load equipment should be tested at the nominal
speed nearest the speed identified on the pump nameplate. Id.
DOE notes that section I.C.1 in appendix A specifies how to
determine the nominal speed of rotation for testing. For instance, for
pumps sold with 4-pole induction motors, the nominal speed of rotation
shall be 1,800 rpm. (See section I.C.1.2) For 4-pole pumps designed for
use with non-induction motors where the operating range of the pump and
motor includes speeds of rotation between 1,440 rpm and 2,160 rpm, the
nominal speed for test would be 1,800 rpm. (See section I.C.1.5)
Whether the pump is sold with variable speed capability is immaterial,
as the determination of nominal test speed is based solely on where the
pump is designed to operate. DOE notes that, to determine the range of
speeds that a pump is designed to operate within, DOE would refer to
published data, marketing literature, and other publicly available
information. This would include the pump nameplate. If the range of
speeds a pump is designed to operate within crosses two or more
categories, manufacturers must test and certify at each relevant
nominal speed.
c. Pump Horsepower and Design Speed
As previously discussed, the current test procedure includes only
ESFM, ESCC, IL, RSV, and ST pumps, each of which is limited by its
respective definition to those with shaft input power greater than or
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and
[[Page 17944]]
full impeller diameter. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i); 10 CFR 431.462.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed comments that some pumps sold
with electronically commutated motors (``ECMs'') and intended to run at
higher speeds, such as 4,320 rpm, must be normalized to rate at 3,600
rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21279-21280. This adjustment causes the power of the
motor to fall below 1 hp, meaning the pump is therefore out of scope.
Id. As stated previously, the pump definitions reference horsepower
limitations based on shaft input power at BEP and full impeller
diameter. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE defines ``BEP'' as the pump hydraulic
power operating point (consisting of both flow and head conditions)
that results in maximum efficiency, and defines ``full impeller
diameter'' as the maximum impeller diameter with which a given pump
basic model is distributed in commerce. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE's test
procedure for pumps at appendix A also includes test provisions for
determining both BEP and pump input power (also known as shaft input
power), as well as provisions for normalizing all measured data to the
specified nominal speed of rotation. As such, while the definitions
themselves do not specify that shaft input power is determined at
nominal speed, DOE understands that the pump definitions could be
interpreted to exclude pumps with shaft input power greater than or
equal to 1 HP at BEP at their design speed, but less than 1 HP when
tested and corrected to nominal speed. In addition, DOE understands
that the value of maximum efficiency varies little with speed, and is
often assumed to be constant, and as such the definition of BEP alone
would not be sufficient to assume that it must be determined at a
certain speed different from that in the test procedure.
However, DOE also notes that it is expanding the current test
procedure scope to include SVIL pumps, which will address this issue.
Specifically, SVIL pumps are fractional horsepower pumps, so even when
corrected to nominal speed, the pumps in question would be included in
scope. DOE understands that use of high frequency (i.e., 4,000 rpm)
ECMs is likely more prevalent on SVILs than on other pumps in this
horsepower range, particularly as a result of their applications and
competition with the circulator market. This means that including SVILs
in this test procedure includes most, if not all, pumps where motor
power decreases below 1 hp when rated at BEP. For these reasons, DOE
did not propose to change the specified horsepower limitations within
the pump category definitions in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268,
21280.
DOE requested comment on its tentative determination that including
SVILs in the test procedure scope will largely eliminate the issue of
higher speed 1 hp pumps falling out of scope when they rate at a
nominal speed of 3,600 rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21273. Grundfos and HI both
agreed with DOE's determination. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3; HI, No. 33
at p. 3)
For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs and in the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE is maintaining the 1 hp limitations in the ESFM,
ESFC, IL, RSV, and ST pump definitions, and is including the 1 hp
limitation in its definitions for RSH, and VT pumps.
d. Pumps Over 200 HP
As previously discussed, the current test procedure includes only
ESFM, ESCC, IL, RSV, and ST pumps. Each of these classes is limited by
its respective definition to those pumps with shaft input power greater
than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter. 10 CFR 431.464(a)(1)(i); 10 CFR 431.462.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, the Efficiency Advocates
encouraged DOE to expand the test procedure scope to include pumps
greater than 200 hp, and stated that motors between 201 and 500 hp are
the most consumptive motor size group in industrial electricity
consumption. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 32 at p. 3) The Efficiency
Advocates further commented that the current calculation methods and
DOE's proposal to allow alternative efficiency determination methods
(AEDMs) in lieu of physical testing would help mitigate test burden
associated with these larger pumps. Id.
DOE notes in response that pumps with shaft input powers over 200
hp generally require larger, more expensive, test stands and testing
facilities. Additionally, these pumps are often ``engineered-to-
order'', resulting in many different basic models. These two factors
would lead to significantly higher per- model test costs than for pumps
with shaft input powers below 200 hp. AEDMs and the calculation methods
in the DOE test procedure for pumps may alleviate some testing burden,
but neither completely negate the need for physical testing of bare
pumps which drives the higher testing burden above 200 hp. At this
time, DOE has determined that expanding the pumps test procedure to
include pumps with shaft powers greater than 200 hp would be too
burdensome to pump manufacturers. DOE may re-evaluate this decision in
a future rulemaking.
e. Horsepower and Number of Stages for Testing
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed how to handle certification
of equipment when some models are regulated, and others are not. 87 FR
21268, 21280. DOE provided an example of an RSV basic model sold with a
1 hp motor tested at 3 stages, which is in scope, and an RSV model that
is 2-stage with a 0.75 hp motor. Id. Since the latter pump uses a 0.75
hp motor, it is partially out of scope. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated it understands that the same
model of RSV pump may be sold with two stages, three stages, or some
other number of stages. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE's RSV pump definition
includes those pumps that have a shaft input power greater than or
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller
diameter and at the number of stages required for testing. 10 CFR
431.462. DOE's testing provisions for RSV pumps in section C.2 of
appendix A specify that the number of stages required for testing is
three, or, if the basic model is only available with fewer than three
stages, the basic model is tested with the maximum number of stages
with which it is distributed in commerce in the United States.
Therefore, in the previous example, the RSV pump model sold with 2 or 3
stages would be included in the scope of the test procedure (and
standards) if it had a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp
when tested at 3 stages, and the resulting PEI would apply to all
stages with which the pump model is sold. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE did
not propose to modify this language in the April 2022 NOPR. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos stated that it
disagrees with DOE's interpretation of the regulation. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 11) Grundfos explained that the definition for a basic model
states that a manufacturer cannot group equipment using DOE-regulated
motors with equipment using motors under 1 hp, and therefore, the
manufacturer would have two basic models, one with pumps at 1 to 200 hp
and a second for pumps under 1 hp. Id. Grundfos added that the second
basic model would not be in scope since RSV pumps with motors under 1
hp are not included in the test procedure scope. Id. Additionally,
Grundfos commented that the same equipment sold as a bare pump would be
considered a single basic model regardless of the number of stages and
shaft power. Id.
DOE notes that the basic model definition in 10 CFR 431.462 states
that all variations in the number of stages of
[[Page 17945]]
bare RSV and ST pumps must be considered a single basic model. The
definition also states that for pumps sold with different motors, the
motors must be in the same motor efficiency band to be considered a
single basic model, referencing Table 3 in appendix A. However, Table 3
does not provide motor efficiencies for fractional horsepower motors.
Additionally, section I.C.2 of appendix A specifies the number of
stages for testing RSV and ST pumps. DOE acknowledges that this leaves
multi-stage pumps sold with fractional horsepower motors out of scope
of this test procedure, whereas equivalent pumps that include the
specified number of stages for testing are included within scope of
this test procedure. This distinction applies only for pumps sold with
motors and does not affect bare pumps, in which DOE's original
interpretation still stands.
f. Design Temperature Range
The current scope for the pumps test procedure is limited to pumps
with a design temperature range between and including 14 to 248 [deg]F.
This range was derived from the original negotiation term sheet for
pumps, which recommended limiting the scope to pumps with a design
range from -10 [deg]C to 120 [deg]C. (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-NOC-0039-
0092). For the purposes of its regulations, DOE translated this range
to Fahrenheit. DOE has received inquires as to whether a pump marketed
for temperatures up to 250 [deg]F is outside of the current test
procedure's scope. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated it reviewed
marketing materials for a number of pumps and found that common upper
limits of temperature are 212, 225, 248, 250, and 300 [deg]F. 87 FR
21268, 21280. Some marketing materials stated that standard seals may
have one high temperature limit while optional seals provide a higher
limit (typically 250 or 300 [deg]F). Id. DOE noted it understood that
the original intent of the scope limitation was to exclude pumps
designed exclusively for low or high temperatures from the test
procedure. Id. However, if a manufacturer is offering a pump model
across all temperature ranges to minimize SKUs, rather than offering
separate low temperature and high temperature models, such a pump model
should be subject to the regulations. Id. DOE explained that only pumps
designed and marketed for temperatures exclusively outside the range of
DOE's scope would be excluded from the test procedure and energy
conservation standards. Id.
DOE also discussed that rounding to a temperature limit of 250
[deg]F when translating from [deg]C to [deg]F would be preferable to
using the exact value of 248 [deg]F since manufacturers commonly use
rounded temperature values in their marketing materials. Id. Similarly,
DOE discussed that it would be preferable to round the lower
temperature limit from 14 [deg]F to 15 [deg]F. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to clarify its design
temperature limits to include equipment that is designed for operation
at temperatures that fall into any part of the range from 15 to 250
[deg]F. 87 FR 21268, 21280. DOE requested comment on this clarification
and on DOE's recommendation to shift the design temperature range from
14 [deg]F to 248 [deg]F to 15 [deg]F to 250 [deg]F. Id.
In response, Grundfos agreed with DOE's intention to clarify the
temperature ranges. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3) HI stated that it does
not expect the temperature adjustment to have a significant impact (HI,
No. 33 at p. 3)
For the reasons discussed previously, DOE is finalizing its
proposed clarifications to the design temperature range which includes
pumps with a design temperature inclusive of any part of the range from
15 [deg]F to 250 [deg]F.
B. Definitions
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed removing certain references
to volute in pump definitions and HI pump class references. 87 FR
21268, 21281. DOE also proposed new definitions for bowl diameter,
SVILs, BB, VT, RSH, RSHIL, and RSHES pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21281-21283.
Further, DOE considered updating the definitions for close-coupled and
mechanically-coupled pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21283-21284.
DOE received one general comment in response to the definitions
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. China suggested that DOE add
corresponding schematic diagrams to textual definitions. (China, No. 29
at p. 3)
DOE understands that diagrams can help provide context and notes
that its current test procedure references ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2 and ANSI/HI
2.1/2.2, which includes pump schematics. However, DOE has found that
schematics may result in greater confusion, since schematics provide a
specific example design but may not apply to other designs. For
instance, a diagram may suggest scope restrictions (or expansions) that
are not consistent with the definition language. Therefore, DOE is not
including schematics or diagrams in addition to its textual
definitions.
1. Removing Certain References to Volute
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, pumps generally have one of
two common discharge types, either a volute or a diffuser. 87 FR 21268,
21281. A volute is made up of one or two scroll-shaped channels,
whereas a diffuser has three or more passages that diffuse the liquid
that is being pumped. Id. The current definitions for end-suction and
in-line pumps use only the term ``volute'' when, in practice, either
volutes or diffusers may be used for these pump categories. For
example, DOE's current definition for end-suction pump specifies that
the liquid is discharged through a volute in a plane perpendicular to
the shaft, while the definition for ESCC pump, which is an end-suction
pump, specifically references OH7 \18\ pumps. 10 CFR 431.462. However,
Table 14.1.3.7 of HI 14.1-14.2-2019 specifies a diffuser as the
standard casing for OH7 pumps. Similarly, DOE's current definition for
IL pump states that the liquid is discharged through a volute in a
plane perpendicular to the shaft, and specifically references OH4 and
OH5 pumps as examples of end-suction pumps. Id. In contrast, Table
14.1.3.7 of HI 14.1-14.2-2019 specifies a diffuser as the standard
casing for OH4 and OH5 pumps. DOE noted in the April 2022 NOPR that HI
1.1-1.2-2014 did not make these casing distinctions. 87 FR 21268,
21281.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ OH5 and OH7 pumps are defined as close-coupled pumps in
ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. OH4 pumps are defined as rigidly-coupled/
short-coupled pumps in ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE interprets the term ``volute'' in its definitions for ``end-
suction pump'' and ``in-line pump'' to mean the part of the pump casing
through which liquid is discharged generally, rather than to reference
a specific type of discharge. To avoid this unintentional inconsistency
between DOE's terminology and the terminology used by the updated
industry standard, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to amend the
definitions of in-line pump and end-suction pump to remove the
distinction that liquid is discharged ``through a volute in a plane
perpendicular to the shaft'' [emphasis added] by specifying instead
that liquid is discharged ``in a plane perpendicular to the shaft.''
Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI, Grundfos, and China stated
they support the volute clarification. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3; China, No.
29 at p. 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3)
For the reasons discussed, DOE is adopting the amended definitions
for
[[Page 17946]]
end-suction and in-line pumps as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. HI Pump Class References
The current DOE definitions for ESCC pump, ESFM pump, IL pump, RSV
pump, and ST pump all include references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 or
ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 pump configurations as examples of pumps that
would meet the given definition. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
to remove references to specific pump configurations as defined in
ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 in the definitions for
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps since DOE and HI terminology are not
wholly consistent. 87 FR 21268, 21281.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos stated it agrees with
the proposal to remove the reference to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 in DOE's
definitions for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at
p. 3) In its comments, HI recommended replacing references to ANSI/HI
1.1-1.2 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2 with the updated ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019,
which superseded ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2. (HI, No. 33 at p.
4) HI further explained that these references are used as the industry
standard and will provide clarity to the market. Id.
DOE notes that its definitional language must be clear and
consistent on its own without the support of diagrams or schematics, as
application of additional diagrams or schematics may confuse the intent
of a given definition. To establish self-contained definitions, DOE is
removing the references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-
2014 in the ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV and ST pump definitions, as proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR. DOE has determined that the definitions without
references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 provide
sufficient specificity to clearly define the various pump categories.
3. Bowl Diameter
The current DOE definition for ``bowl diameter'' references the
definition of ``intermediate bowl'' in ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. This
mention is the sole remaining reference to ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 in the
test procedure, since DOE is eliminating the HI pump class references
to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. In the April 2022
NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that a self-contained definition for
bowl diameter is clearer. 87 FR 21268, 21281. To disassociate the
definition of ``bowl diameter'' from ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014, DOE proposed
in the April 2022 NOPR to define ``bowl diameter'' as ``the maximum
dimension of an imaginary straight line passing through, and in the
plane of, the circular shape of the intermediate bowl of the bare pump
that is perpendicular to the pump shaft and that intersects the
outermost circular shape of the intermediate bowl of the bare pump at
both of its ends.'' Id. With respect to ``intermediate bowl,'' DOE
proposed to define this term as ``the enclosure within which the
impeller rotates and which serves as a guide for the flow from one
impeller to the next.'' Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, both HI and Grundfos encouraged
DOE to also update the definition of ``intermediate bowl'' to be
``bowl'' as defined in ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4;
Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 3)
Considering comments received, DOE is adopting a definition for
``bowl'' rather than ``intermediate bowl.'' DOE is defining bowl in 10
CFR 431.462 to mean a casing in which the impeller rotates, and that
directs flow axially to the next stage or the discharge column. This
definition is consistent with the definition for ``bowl'' in ANSI/HI
14.1-14.2-2019. In this final rule, DOE is modifying the definition for
bowl diameter proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to refer to ``bowl''
instead of ``intermediate bowl''.
4. Small Vertical Inline Pumps
DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to expand the scope of the test
procedure to include SVIL pumps, which are identical to IL pumps except
for having a shaft input power less 1 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21282. The
Circulator Pump Working Group recommended that SVIL pumps be defined as
a single stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that: (1)
has a shaft input power less than 1 hp at the best efficiency point at
full impeller diameter, (2) is distributed in commerce with a motor
that does not have to be in a horizontal position to function as
designed, and (3) discharges the pumped liquid through a volute in a
plane perpendicular to the shaft. (Docket No. EERE-2016-BT-STD-0004,
No. 58 Recommendations #3C at p. 3)
The recommended definition would distinguish SVIL pumps from DOE's
current IL pump definition \19\ in that SVIL pumps have a reduced shaft
power input range \20\ and a different maximum pump power output
limitation.\21\ The change to shaft input power is the primary
distinction between IL and SVIL pumps. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined this distinction would be necessary to
adequately separate the two categories. 87 FR 21268, 21282. The pump
power output is a consequence of the shaft power limitations. Id. DOE
tentatively determined that SVIL pumps do not require a 5 hp pump power
output limitation, as their shaft input power is already capped below 1
hp. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ An ``in-line (IL) pump'' means a pump that is either a
twin-head pump or a single-stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor,
rotodynamic pump that has a shaft input power greater than or equal
to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller
diameter, in which liquid is discharged through a volute in a plane
perpendicular to the shaft. Such pumps do not include pumps that are
mechanically-coupled or close-coupled, have a pump power output that
is less than or equal to 5 hp at BEP at full impeller diameter, and
are distributed in commerce with a horizontal motor.
\20\ IL pumps are constrained to greater than or equal to 1 hp
and less than or equal to 200 hp, whereas SVIL pumps must be less
than 1 hp.
\21\ IL pumps have a limit of 5 hp at BEP, whereas SVIL pumps
have no hp limitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE noted that another difference is that
the IL definition includes a group of three parameters to exclude
circulator pumps--namely that they are either mechanically-coupled or
close-coupled, have a pump power output that is less than or equal to 5
hp at BEP at full impeller diameter, and are distributed in commerce
with a horizontal motor. 87 FR 21268, 21282. In contrast, the
recommended SVIL definition is meant to exclude circulator pumps
through clause (2) (i.e., ``related to distribution in commerce with a
motor that does not have to be in a horizontal position to function as
designed''). Id. On September 9, 2022, DOE published a test procedure
final rule for circulator pumps (``Circulator Pumps TP Final Rule'').
87 FR 57264. In the Circulator Pumps TP Final Rule, DOE defined a
circulator pump as consisting of a wet-rotor circulator pump; dry
rotor, two-piece circulator pump; or dry rotor, three-piece circulator
pumps 87 FR 57264, 57269. The Circulator Pumps TP Final Rule also
defined these subcategories of circulator pumps. Id. In the April 2022
NOPR, DOE proposed that for the SVIL definition, rather than including
the recommendation in clause (2), to instead exclude circulator pumps.
87 FR 21268, 21282. For consistency, DOE also proposed to revise the IL
pump definition to explicitly exclude circulator pumps instead of
including the clauses meant to implicitly exclude them. Id.
DOE notes that clause (3) of the SVIL definition recommended in the
April 2022 NOPR refers to a volute. For the reasons discussed in
section III.B.1 of
[[Page 17947]]
this document, DOE is excluding this reference from the SVIL
definition.
The recommended SVIL pump definition also requires that these pumps
be distributed into commerce with a motor, meaning SVIL pumps cannot be
sold as bare pumps. In the April 2022 NOPR, based on a literature
search, DOE tentatively determined that all SVIL pumps are sold with a
motor. 87 FR 21268, 21282. However, by proposing to replace clause (2)
with an exclusion for circulator pumps, this requirement would be
eliminated. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed that, although not addressed
in the recommendation from the Circulating Pump Working Group, the
defined term ``twin-head pump'' (10 CFR 431.462) would be applicable to
SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21282. Specifically, in the January 2016 Final
Rule, DOE adopted a test procedure for ``twin-head pumps'', where a
twin-head pump is defined as a ``dry rotor, single-axis flow,
rotodynamic pump that contains two impeller assemblies, which both
share a common casing, inlet, and discharge, and each of which (1)
Contains an impeller, impeller shaft (or motor shaft in the case of
close-coupled pumps), shaft seal or packing, driver (if present), and
mechanical equipment (if present); (2) Has a shaft input power that is
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at best
efficiency point (BEP) and full impeller diameter; (3) Has the same
primary energy source (if sold with a driver) and the same electrical,
physical, and functional characteristics that affect energy consumption
or energy efficiency; (4) Is mounted in its own volute; and (5)
Discharges liquid through its volute and the common discharge in a
plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.'' 81 FR 4086, 4115-4117,
4147.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to define SVIL pumps based on
the recommended definition from the Circulator Pump Working Group, with
modifications to include SVILs that are small vertical twin-head pumps,
to exclude pumps that are circulator pumps, and to remove the current
reference to a volute. 87 FR 21268, 21282. Specifically, DOE proposed
to define a ``small vertical in-line pump'' as a small vertical twin-
head pump or a single stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic
pump that (1) has a shaft input power less than 1 hp at the best
efficiency point at full impeller diameter, (2) in which liquid is
discharged in a plane perpendicular to the shaft; and (3) is not a
circulator pump. Id.
Since SVIL pumps are similar to IL pumps but operate at a lower
horsepower, and also are available in twin-head configurations, DOE
also proposed to define ``small vertical twin-head pump'' in the April
2022 NOPR and to extend the twin-head pump test procedure adopted in
the January 2016 Final Rule to small vertical twin-head pumps. 87 FR
21268, 21273.
DOE requested comment on its proposed revision to the IL definition
to explicitly exclude circulator pumps. Both Grundfos and HI agreed
that DOE should revise the IL definition to explicitly exclude
circulator pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4) DOE is
adopting the definition for IL pumps as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR.
DOE also requested comment on the definitions for ``small vertical
in-line pump'' and ``small vertical twin-head pump.'' DOE also
requested comment on the percentage of SVIL pumps, if any, that are not
sold with a motor, and whether the definition of SVIL pumps should be
limited to those sold with a motor.
China requested that DOE provide additional clarity on the number
of motor phases used in SVILs under 0.25 hp. (China, No. 29 at p. 4)
China also commented that the definition for SVILs contains ``with
bearings on both ends of the rotating assembly'' while common IL pumps
on the market do not have bearings at both ends (China, No. 29 at p.
3).
HI commented that including SVILs in the pumps test procedure will
ensure consistency between IL and SVIL pumps and that SVIL pumps should
not be treated differently from IL pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 3, 4).
Regarding China's comment on motor phases for SVILs under 0.25 hp,
DOE clarifies that the SVIL definition does not, nor does any aspect of
the DOE test procedure, limit the number of phases of an SVIL motor
below 0.25 hp. In response to China's question about bearings in the
SVIL definition, DOE notes that the SVIL definition does not include
``with bearings on both ends of the rotating assembly'' and that the
text China referenced is from the proposed definition of BB pumps in
the April 2022 NOPR.
In response to DOE's proposed definition for small vertical twin-
head pumps, Grundfos suggested that DOE revise the term ``twin head
pump'' to ``in[hyphen]line twin[hyphen]head pump'' to minimize
confusion with the small vertical twin-head pump definition. (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 3) Additionally, Grundfos stated that ``Twin Head Pump''
is not consistent with the use of ``twin[hyphen]head'' within the IL
definition and needs a hyphen. Id. HI suggested that DOE clarify if
both the volute discharge and common discharge must meet the ``plane
perpendicular to the impeller shaft'' requirement in the small vertical
twin-head pump definition. (HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
After consideration, DOE has determined that the twin-head and
small vertical twin-head pump definitions are distinct and specific
enough to avoid confusion. In response to HI's comment, DOE clarifies
that only the common discharge of a twin-head and small vertical twin-
head pump have to be in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.
Regarding the percentage of SVILs that are sold with a motor, HI
stated that it does not collect data on SVILs sold without motors and
recommends asking manufacturers for this information during interviews.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 4) While Grundfos commented that it sells a very
small number of SVILs without a motor, it stated that SVILs sold
without a motor should not be excluded. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the SVIL definition proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR, with the following revision: DOE has added a
hyphen to the small vertical twin-head pump term to be consistent with
the twin-head pump term.
5. Between-Bearing Pumps
As discussed in section III.A.3.a of the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to add between-bearing pumps to the scope of its test
procedure and therefore proposed a definition for this pump category.
87 FR 21268, 21282.
ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 defines between-bearing pump as a
rotodynamic pump with the impeller(s) mounted on a shaft between
bearings on either end. In addition, all between-bearing pumps
described in ANSI/HI 14.1-14-2-2019 are mechanically-coupled and dry
rotor. Based on a literature review, DOE tentatively determined in the
April 2022 NOPR that the between-bearing pumps that are most similar to
the pumps currently regulated by DOE have axially-split casings and 1
or 2 stages. 87 FR 21268, 21282. Accordingly, using ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-
2019 as the basis for its approach, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR
to use the defined terms ``dry rotor pump,'' ``rotodynamic pump,'' and
``mechanically-coupled pump'' to define a between-bearing pump, i.e.,
``an axially-split, mechanically-coupled, one- or two-stage, dry rotor,
rotodynamic pump with bearings on both ends of the rotating assembly
that has a shaft input power
[[Page 17948]]
greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP
and full impeller diameter and at the number of stages required for
testing.'' 87 FR 21268, 218221282-21283.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos agreed with DOE's
proposed definition for BB pumps and stated that the definition is
sufficient to identify the intended scope. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4)
HI recommended amending the definition to be consistent with the
definition for BB1 in ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019.\22\ (HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 defines BB1 Pumps as one and two
stage axially split casing pumps that are generally characterized by
the following attributes: (1) pump and drive have separate shafts;
(2) the pump has two integral bearing housings to absorb all pump
axial and radial pump hydraulic loads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed, DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of
this test procedure; therefore, DOE is not adopting the proposed
definition for BB pumps.
DOE also proposed to define ``axially-split pump,'' a term
associated with BB pumps, in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21283.
The term ``axially-split'' refers to a pump casing that can be
separated, for maintenance and assembly, in a plane parallel to the
impeller shaft. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to define an
``axially-split pump'' as ``a pump with a casing that can be separated
or split in a plane that is parallel to and which contains the axis of
the impeller shaft.'' Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI and Grundfos supported DOE's
proposed definitions for axially-split pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p.
4; HI, No. 33 at p. 4)
Again, since DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of this
test procedure, DOE is not adopting the proposed definition for
axially-split pumps.
6. Vertical Turbine Pump
As discussed in section III.A.3.b, DOE is adding vertical turbine
pumps to the scope of its test procedure and proposed a definition for
vertical turbine pumps in the April 2022 NOPR. ANSI/HI 14.2-14.2-2019
defines vertical turbine pumps as ``single-casing, non-submersible
pumps with impellers mounted in a vertically suspended shaft, that
discharge liquid through the column.'' Using this definition as a
basis, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to define ``vertical turbine
pump'' as a vertically-suspended, single-stage or multi-stage, dry
rotor, rotodynamic pump (1) That has a shaft input power greater than
or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full
impeller diameter and at the number of stages required for testing; (2)
For which no external part of such a pump is designed to be submerged
in the pumped liquid; (3) That has a single pressure containing
boundary (i.e., is single casing), which may consist of but is not
limited to bowls, columns, and discharge heads; and (4) That discharges
liquid through the same casing in which the impeller shaft is
contained. 87 FR 21268, 21283.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, both HI and Grundfos
recommended that DOE update the definition for vertical turbine pumps.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 1, 2 and 4; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4) Specifically,
HI and Grundfos mentioned that clause 2 of DOE's definition, which
states ``no external part of such a pump is designed to be submerged in
the pumped liquid,'' would exclude all vertical turbine pumps because
their typical bowl assembly is submerged. Id. HI also explained that,
within the pumps industry, vertical turbine pumps are understood to be
VS1 and V3 types and do not include VS2 \23\ pumps. Id. HI therefore
recommended that DOE reference ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ VS1, VS2, and VS3 pumps are vertically suspended impeller
type pumps that discharge through a column. VS1 pumps have a
diffuser, VS2 pumps use a volute, and VS3 pumps have axial flow.
They are defined further in section 1.3.3.1.2 of ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grundfos suggested that DOE exclude VS2 pumps and change the term
from ``vertical turbine pumps'' to ``vertical turbine, bowl assembly''
to avoid confusion (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 4). Additionally, Grundfos
commented that DOE should add a definition for ``bowl assembly'' and
directly reference section 14.1.7.6 of ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2. Id. Finally,
Grundfos recommended that DOE use the term `bowl assembly' rather than
`pump', since `pump' implies that losses for column, line shaft
discharge head, etc. would be included. Id.
After further evaluation and considering the comments received, DOE
has concluded that the definition for vertical turbine pumps proposed
in the April 2022 NOPR would exclude all vertical turbine pumps since
all or part of the bowl assembly is designed to be submerged in the
pumped fluid. This was not DOE's intent; therefore, DOE is adopting a
revised definition for vertical turbine pump that excludes only pumps
with the driver submerged in the pump liquid. This allows the bowl
assembly of vertical turbine pumps to be submerged in the pumped
liquid, but still differentiates vertical turbine pumps from
submersible turbine pumps. In response to comments from HI and Grundfos
about referencing ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, DOE has determined not to
reference ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 in the definition for vertical turbine
pumps. This determination is discussed in detail in section III.C.1. of
this document. DOE has determined that the adopted definitions in this
final rule are sufficiently specific and detailed to stand on their own
without reference to industry definitions.
7. Radially-Split, Multi-Stage Horizontal Pumps
As discussed in section III.A.3.c, DOE is including RSH pumps with
both end-suction and in-line flow configurations in the scope of the
DOE test procedure. RSH pumps are nearly identical to RSV pumps except
for the mounting orientation and flow configurations. As discussed in
section III.A.3.c, RSH pumps may have different flow configurations
that are expected to impact pump efficiency; therefore, in the April
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed three definitions for RSH pumps based on the
existing DOE definition for RSV pumps: one for an overarching category
of RSH pumps, which does not characterize flow; one for in-line RHS
pumps (``RHSIL''); and one for end-suction RSH pumps (``RSHESS). 10 CFR
431.462; 87 FR 21268, 21283.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, both HI and Grundfos supported
DOE's proposed definitions for RSH, RSHIL, and RSHES pumps. (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 5; HI, No. 33 at p. 5) However, Grundfos commented that
the RSH definitions are quite broad and will likely capture multiple
different pump products under the RSHES definition. (Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 2) Grundfos requested that DOE clarify which pumps meet this
definition and whether these pumps should be considered as a single
pump category. Id.
DOE has determined that additional pump category definitions within
the RSH definitions are not necessary for the purposes of testing. DOE
interprets that the concerns shared by Grundfos are based on
differences in hydraulic performance between different RSH pumps. DOE
notes that should it find notable hydraulic performance differences
between RSH, RSHES, and RSHIL pumps, DOE would consider these
differences and define separate equipment classes accordingly for any
future energy conservation standards rulemaking.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the definitions for RHS, RHSES,
and RHSILs as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
[[Page 17949]]
8. Close-Coupled and Mechanically-Coupled Pumps
DOE defines a close-coupled pump as a pump having a motor shaft
that also acts as the impeller shaft. See 10 CFR 431.462. DOE defines a
mechanically-coupled pump as a pump that has its own impeller shaft and
bearings separate from the motor shaft. See 10 CFR 431.462. In the
April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed how its definitions for close-coupled
and mechanically-coupled pumps did not account for end suction pumps
that do not have bearings separate from the motor and do not have the
impellers mounted on the motor shaft. 87 FR 21268, 21283. In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed revisions to the definitions for close-coupled
and mechanically-coupled pumps to eliminate this gap. Id. DOE proposed
that (1) A close-coupled pump means a pump in which the driver's
bearings absorb the pump's axial load; and (2) A mechanically-coupled
pump means a pump in which bearings external to the driver absorb the
pump's axial load. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI recognized DOE's effort to
clarify the definitions for ESFM and ESCC pumps but provided the
following recommendations to further improve clarity: (1) A close-
coupled pump means a pump in which radial and axial loads are primarily
supported by the driver; and (2) A mechanically-coupled pump means a
pump in which radial and axial loads are primarily supported external
to the driver. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5)
Grundfos commented that the proposed revisions to the ESFM and ESCC
definitions will create additional burden for manufacturers that must
reclassify products accordingly. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5)
DOE interprets HI's comment to indicate that the definitions for
close-coupled and mechanically-coupled proposed in the April 2022 NOPR
did not leave enough flexibility for pumps where most, but not all, of
a pump's axial load is supported by either bearings external to the
driver or by the driver. DOE acknowledges that some flexibility is
important when defining close-coupled and mechanically-coupled to avoid
excluding any end suction pumps. However, DOE notes that the
definitions recommended by HI are vague, specifically the term
``primarily'' which leaves the suggested definition open to
interpretation. In an effort to add flexibility to the definitions
while minimizing the need for interpretation, DOE is adopting the
following definitions for close-coupled and mechanically-coupled pumps,
where the italicized portions of each definition are revisions to the
definitions proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. A close-coupled pump means
a pump in which the driver's bearings are designed to absorb the pump's
axial load. A mechanically-coupled pump means a pump in which bearings
external to the driver are designed to absorb the pump's axial load.
In response to the comment from Grundfos, DOE notes the change in
definition is intended to improve clarity rather than substantively
shift the bounds of the ESCC or ESFM pump categories. DOE has
determined, based on its review of manufacturer literature and the
consensus of industry in the form of HI's comments, that the revisions
to close-coupled and mechanically-coupled pumps do not change the
classification of currently regulated end suction pumps.
C. Updates to Industry Standards
The current DOE test procedure for pumps incorporates the following
industry test standards: HI 40.6-2014, ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014, and ANSI/
HI 2.1-2.2-2014. 10 CFR 431.463. The following sections describe
updates to these industry standards and discuss the industry standards
DOE is incorporating by reference in the final rule and the relevant
provisions of those industry standards that DOE is referencing.
1. ANSI/HI 40.6
The current DOE test procedure for pumps incorporates HI 40.6-2014
for use in appendix A. The most recent version of HI 40.6 was published
in 2021 (``HI 40.6-2021''). HI 40.6-2021 includes the following updates
to HI 40.6-2014 (relevant sections of HI 40.6-2021 are included in
parentheses after a summary of the modification):
(1) Clarified that the industy testing standard covers
efficiency testing of rotodynamic pumps that are subject to DOE's
energy conservation standards. (Section 40.6.1 ``Scope'').
(2) Updated the calculation of bare pump efficiency to match the
current DOE test procedure requirements for plotting test data to
determine the best efficiency point (``BEP'') rate of flow. (Section
40.6.6.3 ``Performance curve'').
(3) Updated the description and requirements of the pressure tap
configuration for measurement sections at inlet and outlet of the
pump. (Section A.3.1.3 ``Pressure taps'').
(4) Added an informative appendix for determining, applying, and
calculating measurement instrument uncertainty. (Appendix H
``Determination, application, and calculation of instrument
(systematic) uncertainty (informative)'').
(5) References ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2 ``Rotodynamic Pumps for
Nomenclature and Definitions'' (``ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2'') which
supersedes ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. (Section
40.6.4.1 ``Vertically suspended pumps''; Section 40.6.4.3 ``All
other pump types'').
(6) Includes a new appendix (Appendix E) for the testing of
circulator pumps. (Appendix E ``Testing Circulator Pumps'').
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that the
provisions of HI 40.6-2021 that correspond to the provisions in HI
40.6-2014 are substantively the same and adopting such provisions would
not change the current test procedure or measured PEI values. 87 FR
21268, 21285. Therefore, in the April 2022 NOPR DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 in place of HI 40.6-2014, in
order to reference the most current industry test procedure. Id.
DOE received no comments on its proposal to incorporate HI 40.6-
2021 by reference for use in appendix A of the DOE test procedure.
Therefore, in this final rule DOE is incorporating HI 40.6-2021 by
reference as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
While DOE proposed to incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 as the
basis for its proposed test procedure, DOE tentatively determined in
the April 2022 NOPR that certain sections of the industry test standard
are not applicable to the DOE test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21285.
Specifically:
(1) Section 40.6.1, Scope, provides the scope specific to the
test methods outlined in HI 40.6-2021;
(2) Section 40.6.5.3 provides provisions regarding the
generation of a test report;
(3) Appendix ``B'' provides informative guidance on test report
formatting;
(4) Appendix ``E'' provides normative test procedures for
circulator pumps; and
(5) Appendix ``G'' compares HI 40.6-2021 and DOE's nomenclature.
Id.
None of these sections are required for testing and rating pumps in
accordance with the test procedure that DOE proposed in the April 2022
NOPR. As such, in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to not adopt
Section 40.6.1, Section 40.6.5.3, appendix B, appendix E, and appendix
G in the April 2022 NOPR. Id.
DOE received no comments on the proposal to exclude the specified
sections of HI 40.6-2021 from the DOE test procedure. Therefore, in
this final rule, DOE is adopting the exclusions as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR.
Additionally, as discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, certain
provisions of HI 40.6-2021 are consistent with the provisions of the
current DOE test procedure in appendix A. 87 FR 21268, 21285. DOE
proposed to remove these provisions in appendix A and instead reference
the appropriate sections of HI 40.6-2021, specifically:
[[Page 17950]]
(1) Section I.D.1 of appendix A, which addresses damping
devices, is amended to reference the corresponding provisions in HI
40.6.3.2.2;
(2) Section I.D.2 of appendix A, which addresses stabilization,
is amended to reference the corresponding provisions in HI
40.6.5.5.1;
(3) Section I.D.3 of appendix A, which addresses calculations
and rounding, is amended to reference the corresponding provisions
in HI 40.6.6.1.1;
(4) Sections III.D.1, IV.D.1, V.D.1, VI.D.1, and VII.D.1 of
appendix A, which outline testing the BEP of different pump
configurations, are amended to reference the corresponding
provisions in HI 40.6.5.5.1. Id.
DOE received no comments on its proposal to remove provisions of
appendix A and instead reference the equivalent provisions in HI 40.6-
2021 and is therefore adopting the revisions as proposed in the April
2022 NOPR.
2. ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014
Subpart Y to part 431 currently incorporates by reference ANSI/HI
1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. DOE references ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-
2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 for defining certain terms in 10 CFR
431.462. In 2019, ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 were
updated and combined into ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, ``American National
Standard for Rotodynamic Pumps for Nomenclature and Definitions''
(``ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019''). The notable additions to ANSI/HI 14.1-
14.2 that were absent in ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014
are outlined below:
(1) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 includes additional figures and
tables to represent information included in ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and
ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014;
(2) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 adds new pump definitions and pump
classifications;
(3) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 includes configuration definitions
for vertical in-line, vertical end-suction, vertical self-priming,
seal-less, magnetic drive, canned motor, and multi-stage pumps;
(4) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 adds new definitions for discharge
casing, volute, concentric casing, modified concentric casing, vaned
diffuser/collector, bowl, and stage casing; and \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ A volute may also be referred to as a ``housing'' or
``casing.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 includes a new ``preferred operating
region'' section to define a guideline for recommended operating
flow rates.
As stated previously, the current DOE test procedure incorporates
pump designations from ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 as
examples for the definitions of ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSV, and ST pumps under
the DOE test procedure. 10 CFR 431.462. DOE notes that, in general, the
references to ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 are in the
context of providing non-limiting examples. DOE is concerned that
continued inclusion of HI pump designations as examples of specific
pump categories may cause confusion in the market or be misunderstood
to limit the scope of the relevant definitions. To minimize potential
misapplication of its definitions, DOE is removing the references to
ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 as examples of certain
pump category definitions, as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
21268, 21286. Additional detail on the adopted changes to the
definitions is discussed in section III.B.2 of this document.
Additionally, DOE's current test procedure definition of ``bowl
diameter'' relies on the ``intermediate bowl'' definition in ANSI/HI
2.1-2.2-2014. As proposed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE is modifying its
definition for ``bowl diameter'' and adding a DOE definition for
``bowl'' to remove the current reference to ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014. Id.
These changes will create a more self-contained definition and are
discussed in section III.B.3 of this document.
DOE is incorporating ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 by reference for use in
appendix A since it is referenced in HI 40.6-2019. However, DOE does
not directly reference ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 in appendix A.
D. Metric
The current energy efficiency standards for pumps are based on the
PEI metric. 10 CFR 431.465. The PEI metric is a ratio of the pump
energy rating (``PER'') of the tested pump to the PER of a minimally
compliant pump (``PERSTD''). See section II of appendix A.
The current test procedure defines the PEICL metric as the
pump energy index for a constant load, as applicable to pumps rated as
bare pumps or sold with motors; and the PEIVL metric, the
pump energy index for a variable load, as applicable to pumps sold with
motors and continuous controls or noncontinuous controls. Appendix A,
section II.A. A ``continuous control'' is a control that adjusts the
speed of the pump driver continuously over the driver's operating speed
range in response to incremental changes in the required pump flow,
head, or power output. 10 CFR 431.462. A ``non-continuous control'' is
a control that adjusts the speed of a driver to one of a discrete
number of non-continuous pre-set operating speeds and does not respond
to incremental reductions in the required pump flow, head, or power
output. Id.
PERCL is calculated as the average of driver power input
at 75 percent, 100 percent, and 110 percent of flow at the BEP, where
the flows are achieved by varying the operating head to follow the pump
performance curve. See appendix A, section II.A.1 and subsequently
referenced sections. PERVL is calculated as the average of
driver power input at 25 percent, 50 percent, 75 percent, and 100
percent of flow at BEP, where the flows are achieved by speed reduction
to follow a specified system curve. See appendix A, section II.A.2 and
subsequently referenced sections. BEP is defined as the pump hydraulic
power operating point (consisting of both flow and head conditions)
that results in the maximum efficiency. 10 CFR 431.462.
This section discusses the regulatory metric for SVIL pumps and
additional clean water pumps that DOE is incorporating into its test
procedure.
In the April 2022 NOPR, based on manufacturer feedback to this
rulemaking and the current circulator pumps rulemaking,\25\ DOE
tentatively determined that use of PERCL and
PERVL and indexing the results against PERSTD
would be a reasonable and consistent way to evaluate SVIL performance.
87 FR 21268, 21286. This determination was based largely on the
similarity of SVILs to in-line pumps, which are evaluated using the
PERCL and PERVL metrics. Id. As such, DOE
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that the rating metric for SVIL pumps
would be PEICL for constant load pumps and PEIVL
for variable load pumps, equivalent to the metric already in use for
currently covered commercial and industrial pumps. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ A link to the circulator pumps docket web page can be found
at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2016-BT-STD-0004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 2022 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that, for BB, VT,
and RSH pumps, the test procedure will measure energy efficiency during
a representative average use cycle and not be unduly burdensome to
conduct. 87 FR 21268, 21286. This determination was based on the
similarities between the pump categories that are addressed in the
current test procedure and those that DOE proposed to include in the
scope of the test procedure. Id. DOE tentatively determined that
PEICL and PEIVL are appropriate metrics for BB,
VT, and RSH pumps. Id. Using PEICL and PEIVL for
these additional pump categories ensures a consistent rating approach
in the market. Id. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that the
PEICL and PEIVL metric would be used
[[Page 17951]]
for rating the performance of BB, VT, and RSH pumps. Id.
For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs, for SVIL,
VT, and RSH pumps, DOE is adopting PEICL for constant load
pumps and PEIVL for variable load pumps, equivalent to the
metric already in use for currently covered commercial and industrial
pumps.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, China suggested that DOE revise
PERstd on the basis of a scientific assessment of the new
pumps being added to the test procedure scope. (China, No. 29 at p. 3)
DOE notes that this test procedure final rule does contain amendments
that may adjust PERstd for both current and expanded scope
pumps. However, the overall methodology of determining
PERstd does not differ by pump category; PERstd
is specific to the flow and specific speed of a given pump model and
includes a C-value that sets the energy conservation standard and is
specific to a given pump category. Adopting a C-value for the expanded
scope pumps would be considered in an energy conservation standard
rulemaking rather than in this test procedure rulemaking.
E. Amendments to Test Method
DOE is incorporating HI 40.6-2021 into appendix A of subpart Y of
10 CFR part 431. HI 40.6-2021 specifies calculating pump power
input,\26\ driver power input (for testing-based methods),\27\ pump
power output,\28\ pump efficiency,\29\ bowl efficiency,\30\ overall
efficiency,\31\ and other relevant values at the specified load points
necessary to determine PEICL and PEIVL. HI 40.6-
2021 also contains provisions for test methodology, standard rating
conditions, equipment specifications, uncertainty calculations, and
tolerances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ The term ``pump power input'' in HI 40.6-2021 is defined as
``the power transmitted to the pump by its driver'' and is
synonymous with the term ``pump shaft input power,'' as used in this
document.
\27\ The term ``driver power input'' in HI 40.6-2014 is defined
as ``the power absorbed by the pump driver'' and is synonymous with
the term ``pump input power to the driver,'' as used in this
document.
\28\ The term ``pump power output'' in HI-40.6-2021 is defined
as ``the mechanical power transferred to the liquid as it passes
through the pump, also known as pump hydraulic power.'' It is used
synonymously with ``pump hydraulic power'' in this document.
\29\ The term ``pump efficiency'' is defined in HI 40.6-2014 as
a ratio of pump power output to pump power input.
\30\ The term ``bowl efficiency'' is defined in HI 40.6-2014 as
a ratio of pump power output to bowl assembly power input and is
applicable only to VTS and RSV pumps.
\31\ The term ``overall efficiency'' is defined in HI 40.6-2014
as a ratio of pump power output to driver power input and describes
the combined efficiency of a pump and driver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sections II through VII of appendix A specify methods for
determining PEICL and PEIVL for pumps based on
whether they are distributed into commerce with a motor and/or with
controls. These sections are summarized as follows:
Section II: Calculation of PEICL or PEIVL for all pumps
based on the pump energy rating for a minimally compliant reference
pump (PERCL or PERVL, respectively);
Section III: Test procedure for bare pumps;
Section IV: Testing-based approach for pumps sold with
motors;
Section V: Calculation-based approach for pumps sold with
motors;
Section VI: Testing-based approach for pumps sold with
motors and controls; and
Section VII: Calculation-based approach for pumps sold
with motors and controls.
See appendix A, sections I.A.2 through I.A.6.
The following sections summarize the amendments to the current test
procedure that DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR, address stakeholder
comments on these proposals, and finalize provisions for the amended
test procedure.
1. Nominal Speed
The scope of the current test procedure is limited to pumps
designed to operate with either a 2- or 4-pole induction motor or a
non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating range between
2,880 and 4,320 rpm and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm. 10 CFR
431.464(a)(1)(ii)(D). Section I.C.1 of appendix A specifies the
selection of nominal speed of rotation of either 1,800 or 3,600 rpm
depending on the number of poles of the motor or the operating range of
non-induction motors.
As discussed in section III.A.4.b, DOE is including pumps that
operate at greater than or equal to 960 rpm and less than 1,440 rpm or
are designed to operate with 6-pole motors in the test procedure. In
the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that these pumps would be tested with
a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm. 87 FR 21268, 21287. DOE also proposed to
update the calculation and rounding sections of the test procedure to
address this additional nominal speed. Id.
China commented that the DOE test procedure for 1,200 rpm pumps may
result in cavitation and suggested that DOE instead provide a speed
reduction test using pump affinity rules. (China, No. 29 at p. 3)
DOE notes that the test procedure for 1,200 rpm pumps would use a
nominal test speed of 1,200 rpm. DOE has determined that this would be
most representative of field operation for these pumps. If cavitation
occurs at 1,200 rpm for a given pump under test, DOE considers that
this is representative of field performance and is therefore a valid
test. No other stakeholders identified cavitation as an issue for 1,200
rpm pumps.
HI stated it expects testing 6-pole pumps will significantly
increase test burden and test cost; however, HI expects minimal energy
savings relative to manufacturer impact since the volume of equipment
impacted is small. (HI, No. 33 at p.3). Specifically, HI stated that
most of these pumps are already regulated as 4-pole products. Id.
In response to HI's comments, DOE notes that increased burden
associated with test procedure modifications is estimated and discussed
in section III.L of this document. DOE will evaluate energy savings
during its energy conservation standards rulemaking.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the amendments to the test
procedure as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. Testing of Multi-Stage Pumps
The current DOE test procedure specifies that RSV pumps shall be
tested with three stages and that ST pumps shall be tested with nine
stages. If the unit under test is only available with fewer than the
required number of stages, the pump is tested with the maximum number
of stages with which the unit is distributed in commerce in the United
States. If the unit under test is only available with greater than the
number of required stages, the pump is tested with the lowest number of
stages with which the unit is distributed in commerce in the United
States. If the unit under test is available with both fewer and greater
than the required number of stages, but not the required number of
stages, the pump is tested with the number of stages closest to the
required number of stages. If both the next lower and next higher
number of stages are equivalently close to the required number of
stages, the pump is tested with the next higher number of stages. See
appendix A, section I.C.2.
RSH and VT pumps also may be sold with a varying number of stages,
in which the same pump may have options for multiple different stages
for multiple applications. To reduce testing burden and mirror the
practice established for RSV pumps, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR
that RSH pumps be tested with three stages. 87 FR 21268, 21287. To
reduce testing burden and mirror the
[[Page 17952]]
practice established for ST pumps, DOE proposed testing VT pumps with
nine stages. Id. If the pump under test is not distributed in commerce
with the number of stages prescribed for testing, DOE proposed that the
existing instructions for selecting the correct number of stages during
testing would be followed. Id.
As defined in section III.B.5, BB pumps can have either one or two
stages. For BB basic models that are distributed into commerce with
both one and two stages, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to test BB
pumps at two stages. 87 FR 21268, 21287. DOE discussed that this
approach is consistent with the provisions in the current test
procedure that require multi-stage pumps be tested with more than one
stage. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI and Grundfos supported the
proposed number of stages for testing RSH, VT, and BB pumps. (HI, No.
33 at p. 5; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) HI additionally commented that a
one-stage BB pump and a two-stage BB pump will always be different
basic models. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5) China requested that DOE provide
additional description for when BB pumps would be tested using one-
stage versus two-stage. (China, No. 29 at p. 4)
As DOE is not including BB pumps within the scope of this test
procedure DOE is not adopting the multi-stage testing provisions for BB
pumps proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs, DOE is
adopting the number of stages for testing RSH and VT pumps test
procedure as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
3. Load Profile
The current test procedure requires that the constant load pump
energy rating be determined using 75, 100 and 110 percent of BEP flow
with each value multiplied by 0.3333 and the results summed to
determine PERCL. Appendix A, sections III.E, IV.E, V.E.
Similarly, for variable load pumps, energy ratings are determined at
25, 50, 75, and 100 percent of BEP flow with each point weighted by
0.25 and summed to obtain a value for PERVL. Appendix A,
sections VI.E, VII.E.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed the current load profiles in
response to comments received from stakeholders on the April 2021 RFI.
87 FR 21268, 21288. Specifically, DOE agreed with stakeholders that
load profiles vary depending on the pump installation environment and
application; however, DOE stated that the existing load profiles
provide a consistent method for comparing the performance of different
pumps. Id. DOE did not propose to modify the current load profiles in
the April 2022 NOPR.
NEEA recommended that DOE consider test procedures and metrics that
better account for motor and control performance at various load points
in the future. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) The CA IOUs stated that they are
not aware of any reports that provide BB pump-specific operating hour
ranges but suggested that DOE review industrial cooling, boiler
feedwater, and municipal water supply application reports. (CA IOUs,
No. 32 at p. 3)
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE is not revising the
current load profiles in this final rule notice. Additionally, SVIL,
VT, and RSH pumps will use the same load profiles as other pumps
previously covered in the scope of this rulemaking and described in the
preceding paragraphs. DOE will continue to evaluate the impact of load
profile on PEI.
4. Pumps With BEP at Run-Out
To determine a pump's BEP, the DOE test procedure references
testing provisions included in HI 40.6-2014 (excluding sections
40.6.5.3, section A.7 and appendix B) at the following seven flow
points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of the expected BEP
flow rate of the pump at the nominal speed of rotation. Appendix A,
section III.D.1. All pumps have a maximum flow rate which is termed
``run-out.'' For pumps where the BEP is expected to be within 20
percent of the maximum flow rate of the pump (BEP at run-out), section
I.D.4 of appendix A provides alternative flow points, with the maximum
flow point equal to 100 percent of the expected maximum flow rate so
that the pump may safely operate. As discussed in section III.C.1,
Sections 40.6.5.5.1 and 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-2021 now include provisions
related to pumps with BEP at run-out. Section 40.6.5.5.1 provides
alternate test points based on the expected BEP rate of flow for pumps
with a maximum allowable flow rate as specified by the manufacturer
that is less than 120 percent of the BEP flow rate. Section 40.6.6.3
also provides alternate tested load points for the driver input power
as a percentage of BEP flow rate for pumps that cannot be safely tested
to flows greater than 120 percent of BEP. However, these provisions are
based on flow points with respect to expected BEP flow rate rather than
expected maximum flow rate.
In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE responded to a comment from HI
that in order to determine the location of BEP, testing must occur at
rates of flow greater than 100 percent of expected BEP flow. 81 FR
4086, 4117. DOE stated that its proposal to use flow points only up to
100 percent was with respect to the expected maximum allowable flow
rate rather than with respect to expected BEP. Id. DOE notes that the
existing regulatory text contains an omission in which section I.D.4(1)
of appendix A only refers to ``the expected,'' while section I.D.4(2)
refers to ``the expected maximum flow rate of the pump.'' In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to include ``expected maximum flow rate of the
pump'' in both section I.D.4(1) and I.D.4(2) of appendix A and would
not reference sections 40.6.5.5.1 or 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-2021. 87 FR
21268, 21288. DOE requested comment on whether the alternate flow
points for pumps with BEP at run-out should be determined with respect
to expected maximum flow rate or expected BEP flow rate. Id.
In response, HI recommended that DOE modify the test procedure to
require testing at 105 percent of BEP as a minimum criterion for pumps
that cannot be tested to 120 percent of BEP. (HI, No. 33 at p. 5) HI
suggested 105 percent of BEP because lower specific speed pumps can
artificially benefit by truncating the actual BEP flow. Id. Grundfos
commented that using the maximum flow rate provides a better curve for
finding BEP and ensures that curve shape after BEP is properly captured
(where possible). (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) Grundfos additionally
stated that using maximum expected flow can require a second test in
some cases, with small additional burden, if BEP is found to be plus or
minus 5 percent of the tested points but noted that this burden would
be small given the limited systems reporting using BEP at run-out
provisions. Id.
DOE notes that by relying on maximum expected flow rather than
expected BEP flow rate, it is likely that most pumps would test at a
minimum of 105 percent of BEP, as in most cases, maximum expected flow
would not be less than 5% away from BEP. This addresses HI's suggestion
to have a minimum point at 105 percent of BEP, while also making sure
that all pumps in this category can be tested. This is also consistent
with Grundfos' comment that maximum flow provides a better curve shape,
especially after BEP. For these reasons, DOE is adopting BEP at run-out
provisions as proposed.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed that the current regulatory
text would benefit from additional detail as to how the revised loading
[[Page 17953]]
points should be applied in the determination of PERSTD. 87
FR 21268, 21288. DOE proposed to specify that the revised loading
points would only be used in application of the [alpha]i
coefficient values when determining pump power input, and not when
determining specific speed (``Ns'') or the minimally-compliant pump
efficiency (``[eta]pump,STD''), which should always be based
on 100 percent of BEP flow for standardization purposes. Id. DOE did
not receive any comments regarding how the revised loading points
should be applied in the determination of PERSTD. Therefore,
DOE is including the language as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
As part of the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also identified that the
current provisions for pumps with BEP at run-out do not address how to
perform motor sizing for bare pumps, which is based on the horsepower
equivalent to, or the next highest horsepower greater than, the pump
power input to the bare pump at 120 percent of the BEP flow rate of the
tested pump. 87 FR 21268, 21288-21289. DOE proposed that for pumps with
BEP at run-out, motor sizing would be based on 100 percent of the BEP
flow rate of the tested pump, as there are no flow rates available
higher than that level. Id. However, DOE acknowledged in the April 2022
NOPR that this proposed change could result in inequitable motor sizing
compared to pumps not subject to these provisions. Id.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos agreed with the use of
maximum flow rate to ensure BEP can be determined for motor sizing for
bare pumps. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 6)
In this final rule, DOE is including the motor sizing language for
pumps with BEP at run-out, as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
5. Calibration of Measurement Equipment
The current DOE test procedure references HI 40.6-2014 Appendix D,
which specifies the frequency at which measurement equipment should be
calibrated. Table D.1 of HI 40.6-2014 states that manufacturer's
recommendations on calibration intervals should be followed if they
differ from those in Table D.1. However, DOE notes that its test
procedure does not explicitly reference Table D.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
In the dedicated-purpose pool pump test procedures included in
appendices B and C to subpart Y of 10 CFR part 431 (``appendix B'',
``appendix C''), DOE has included the calibration requirements
contained in Appendix D of ANSI/HI 40.6-2014, with modification
allowing for calibration periods up to 3 times longer than those
specified in Table D.1 of ANSI/HI 40.6-2014 if justified by historical
calibration data. See appendix B, section I.B.2 and appendix C, section
I.B.2.
Similar to the approach that DOE uses in appendix B and appendix C,
DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to specifically reference the
calibration requirements in Appendix D of HI 40.6-2021 in section I.B
of appendix A to improve the overall clarity of its test procedure. 87
FR 21268, 21289.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, Grundfos agreed that including
the reference to HI 40.6, Appendix D provides consistency and clarity
regarding the required calibration requirements for testing. (Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 11).
For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs and the
stakeholder feedback received, DOE is adopting Table D.1 of ANSI/HI
40.6-2021 as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
6. Calculations and Rounding
The DOE test procedure includes provisions for calculations and
rounding in section I.D.3 of appendix A. Generally, all measured data
must be normalized such that it represents performance at nominal speed
of rotation in accordance with HI 40.6-2014, and all calculations must
be carried out using raw measured values without rounding. See appendix
A, section I.D.3. PER is rounded to three significant digits and PEI is
rounded to the hundredths place. Id. Explicit rounding directions are
not provided for other parameters.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE did not propose any changes to its
current rounding requirements, except for updates to reference the
appropriate section of HI 40.6-2021, as discussed in section III.C.1 of
this document. 87 FR 21268, 21289.
DOE did not receive comments on this proposal. For the reasons
discussed in the preceding paragraphs and in the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
is adopting the updated references as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
F. Calculation-Based and Testing-Based Options According to Pump
Configuration (Table 1 of Appendix A)
The DOE test procedure for pumps includes calculation-based and
testing-based options that apply based on pump configuration (including
style of motor and control) as distributed in commerce. See appendix A,
Table 1. The calculation-based options rely on a bare pump test,
whereas the testing-based options rely on a ``wire-to-water'' test. The
calculation-based options may reduce test burden by allowing a
manufacturer to test a sample of bare pumps and use that data to rate
multiple pump configurations using calculation-based methods. On the
other hand, wire-to-water testing may more accurately represent pump,
motor, and control performance.
1. Hybrid Mapping Approach
In response to the April 2021 RFI, NEEA recommended that DOE
consider a hybrid approach to testing and calculation, similar to the
test method included in Appendix H of ANSI/AMCA Standard 214-21, ``Test
Procedure for Calculating Fan Energy Index (FEI) for Commercial and
Industrial Fans and Blowers'' (''AMCA 214''), which stipulates a one-
time test of the motor at multiple load points, which can be used to
determine the input power at the appropriate pump test procedure load
points and then used to calculate a rating. With this method, each
motor need only be tested once, and the results used for multiple pump
configurations. (NEEA, No. 21 at p. 10)
Similarly, in response to the April 2021 RFI, with respect to pumps
sold with inverter-only motors, the CA IOUs cautioned against the use
of a losses table for permanent magnet inverter-only motors with a non-
integrated controller sold with a choice of controller due to variance
in performance between drive units (as opposed to induction motors,
which are relatively uninfluenced by choice of drive unit) and instead
recommended this subset use a hybrid power drive system mapping
procedure, which they expected would reduce burden. (CA IOUs, No. 19 at
pp. 8-9)
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE acknowledged that permanent magnet
inverter-only motors sold without a controller may perform differently
based on the inverter with which it is paired and recognized that a
hybrid mapping approach may be beneficial. 87 FR 21268, 21290, 21299.
However, DOE stated that it did not expect that the use of a hybrid
mapping approach would provide the burden reduction intended by the use
of the calculation method. 87 FR 21268, 21299. While the hybrid mapping
approach would be less burdensome than multiple wire-to-water tests, it
would likely be significantly more burdensome than a calculation-based
approach based on a bare pump test, as it would require physical tests
of all motors with which the bare pump would be paired. Id.
Furthermore, DOE
[[Page 17954]]
tentatively concluded that the calculation-based approach is sufficient
to generate appropriately representative values for this equipment--and
with the option to allow for a testing-based approach, or an AEDM as
discussed in section III.I.2, a manufacturer would be free to refine
accuracy of the values for specific equipment. Id.
DOE did not propose a hybrid approach in the April 2022 NOPR but
requested comment on whether manufacturers would use a hybrid mapping
approach, and if so, whether manufacturers would conduct the motor
tests or request the tests from their suppliers. 87 FR 21268, 21290. In
addition, DOE requested comment on what additional provisions would
need to be added to Appendix H of AMCA 214 to make it applicable to
pumps, such as speed and load corresponding to pump rating points. Id.
Finally, DOE requested comment on the merits of using a hybrid mapping
approach specific to inverter-only motors and whether it would reduce
or increase manufacturer burden compared to the current proposals. 87
FR 21268, 21299.
HI stated that hybrid mapping is not a current practice, so
including this would add complexity and confusion, without an
understood benefit. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6, 7) HI stated that the hybrid
approach would be significantly more burdensome than a calculation-
based approach based on a bare pump test, and that the calculation
approach based on coefficients and bare pump test is sufficient to
generate appropriately representative values or the equipment. (HI, No.
33 at p. 7). HI added that in many cases hybrid mapping data would not
be available. For these reasons HI is not in favor of a hybrid mapping
approach for inverter-only motors. Id.
Grundfos stated that compared to the current proposals of
calculated method and AEDM, it did not believe a hybrid mapping
approach would reduce burden. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) Grundfos
commented that a hybrid mapping approach is not currently necessary
since DOE has proposed a method for calculating PEIs for pumps sold
with inverter[hyphen]only motors. Id. at 6. However, Grundfos also
stated they believe a hybrid mapping approach could provide more
representative PEIs when compared to calculation[hyphen]based
approaches, but that more effort would be necessary to define a
suitable motor mapping procedure to ensure it is applicable to pumping.
Id.
NEEA recommended that in future proceedings DOE consider an
optional hybrid approach to testing pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous motors to show the improvement in Pump Energy Index (PEI)
from IE5 motors. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 2)
DOE agrees with stakeholders that it is premature to develop a
hybrid mapping approach in this rulemaking, but notes that DOE may
consider the issue in future rulemakings.
2. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Induction Motors and Controls
Based on its review of available coefficients and part-load loss
data, DOE tentatively determined in the April 2022 NOPR that without
further data indicating that its current coefficients overstate motor
drive system losses for pumps, it would retain its current loss model
for motors less than 50 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21296. DOE noted that its
current coefficients correspond to about 30 percent added harmonic
losses and a 3 percent variable frequency drive (``VFD'') efficiency
penalty. Id. DOE stated that it would consider revising its
coefficients below 50 hp in accordance with the method suggested by
HI,\32\ or to harmonize with fans or with international standards,
given appropriate data specific to pumps. Id. To ensure that the
calculation method does not overrate pumps, while balancing
stakeholders' requests for representativeness, DOE proposed to allow
use of an AEDM, as discussed in section III.I.2 of this document. Id.
DOE requested (1) data indicating whether AHRI 1210-certified data is
applicable to pumps as well as any other applicable part-load loss
data; (2) data indicating whether 15 percent and 25 percent incremental
losses, which are specified as part of IE3 ratings that are not
commonly used in the U.S., are applicable to the U.S. and do not
overstate performance, and if not, what incremental losses would be
appropriate to apply, and (3) data indicating an appropriate VFD
efficiency penalty by hp. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ HI suggested new part load loss coefficients based on the
differences between incremental losses predicted by IEC 60034-31 and
the current DOE part load loss coefficients. (HI, No. 22 at p. 3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HI stated that related to item 2, the 15 percent and 25 percent
incremental losses are appropriate and should be representative of
motors commonly used in the U.S. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI understood
that NEMA supported these values and is adopting them into a future
American National Standard. Id.
In its comment to the April 2021 RFI, HI stated that losses are
especially overstated in the 50 hp to 100 hp range. (HI, No. 22 at p.3)
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE discussed its findings that its existing
coefficients show a decrease in full-load efficiency at 75 hp, which
would not be expected. 87 FR 21268, 21296. In addition, DOE noted that
the AHRI 1210-certified data is limited to a maximum of 75 hp and does
not exist at higher hp. Id. Furthermore, DOE stated that its current
coefficients in the 50 hp to 100 hp range correspond to about 60
percent added harmonic losses and a 3 percent VFD penalty, and, based
on previous discussion of typical losses, DOE tentatively determined
that these losses are too high. Id.
In light of the fact that DOE's coefficients in the 50 hp to 100 hp
represent harmonic losses that are too high, DOE proposed in the April
2022 NOPR to update its coefficients for motors rated at 50 hp and
above. 87 FR 21268, 21296. To adjust its coefficients for motors 50 hp
and above, DOE started with the current DOE default losses for the
motor-only at full-load and added 15 to 25 percent losses, as
applicable, as well as a VFD efficiency penalty of 3 percent. Id. DOE
then adjusted the current DOE default losses for the motor and control
at 100 percent to match the result of adding the incremental harmonic
losses and VFD penalty, and applied the same adjustment factor to all
load points. Id. Table III.1 summarizes DOE's proposal for the
induction motor and control part-load loss coefficients. Id. DOE
requested comment on its proposed part-load loss factors for induction
motors and controls greater than 50 hp. Id.
Table III.1--Proposed Induction Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coefficients for induction motor and control
part load loss factor (zi)
Motor horsepower (hp) -----------------------------------------------
a b c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5............................................................. -0.4658 1.4965 0.5303
[[Page 17955]]
>5 and <=20..................................................... -1.3198 2.9551 0.1052
>20 and <=50.................................................... -1.5122 3.0777 0.1847
>50 and <=100................................................... -0.6629 2.1452 0.1952
>100............................................................ -0.7583 2.4538 0.2233
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grundfos agreed that the updated coefficients better represent
losses for motors greater than 50 hp. (Grundfos, No. 30 at p. 6) HI
stated that it reviewed the coefficients proposed by DOE compared to
those suggested by HI and noted only minor deviations in the calculated
PEI. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI supported the part-load loss factors for
induction motors and controls proposed by DOE. Id.
For the reasons discussed previously, and based on stakeholder
feedback, DOE is finalizing the updated induction motor and control
part load loss factor equation coefficients as proposed and shown in
Table III.1.
3. Calculation Method for Pumps Sold With Inverter-Only Motors (With or
Without Controls)
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that, to the extent that DOE
adopts a definition, test procedure, and energy conservation standard
for synchronous electric motors that are inverter-only electric motors,
DOE would reference such regulations in the pumps test procedure,
allowing for the use of the calculation method by pumps sold with
synchronous electric motors that are inverter-only electric motors. 87
FR 21268, 21298.
a. Reliance on DOE Motors Test Procedure and Development of
Coefficients
DOE published a NOPR regarding the test procedures for motors
(``Motors TP NOPR''), in which DOE proposed to test inverter-only
synchronous electric motors (inclusive of the inverter) that include an
inverter in accordance with section 7.7.2 of IEC 61800-9-2:2017, using
the test provisions specified in section 7.7.3.5 and testing conditions
specified in section 7.10. 86 FR 71710, 71742 (Dec. 17, 2021). DOE
proposed to test inverter-only synchronous electric motors that do not
include an inverter in the same manner and to specify that testing must
be performed using an inverter as recommended in manufacturer catalogs
or offered for sale with the electric motor. Id. In the April 2022
NOPR, DOE proposed to require the nameplate efficiency of the inverter-
only synchronous electric motors tested in accordance with any relevant
test procedure in subpart B to part 431, if available, or if not
available, in accordance with the DOE motors test procedure, should it
be finalized. 87 FR 21268, 21298. DOE noted that this nameplate
efficiency, as proposed, would be representative of the motor +
inverter efficiency rather than just the motor efficiency. Id.
As proposed in the Motors TP NOPR, manufacturers of synchronous
electric motors would not be required to test according to the DOE test
procedure, if finalized, until the compliance date of energy
conservation standards. 86 FR 71710, 71716. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE
stated that should it finalize a test procedure for these motors, there
may be a period of time in which motor manufacturers would not be
required to publish efficiency information for these motors. 87 FR
21268, 21298. However, DOE stated that since the proposed electric
motors test procedure is an IEC test procedure, if DOE's proposal in
the Motors TP NOPR were finalized, the tested efficiency of the
synchronous inverter-only electric motors + inverters would likely
already be available. Id.
Based on this premise, DOE proceeded to discuss a proposal
regarding development of coefficients for the calculation method for
pumps sold with inverter-only motors. 87 FR 21268, 21297-21299. DOE
noted that in a submittal responding to the April 2021 RFI, HI stated
that it developed coefficients and calculation modifications for
inverter-only motors by establishing the incremental loss delta between
power drive systems operating with induction motors and power drive
systems operating with inverter-only motors. (HI, No. 22 at pp. 1-2) HI
commented that it used actual motor data from multiple manufacturers to
calculate these coefficients. Id. The coefficients developed by HI
would require using either IE4 or IE5 minimum efficiencies (IEC 60034-
30-2) \33\ in the Section VII calculation for the equipped motor
efficiency in appendix A. Id. HI also provided limited comparisons of
the recommended inverter-only calculation method to test data for IE5
products. In five out of six cases, the calculation method resulted in
a PEI equivalent to or higher than the test method. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ The International Electrotechnical Commission (``IEC'')
standards IEC 60034-30 for variable-speed electric motors
establishes an efficiency classification system for these motors.
Efficiency classes are designated as IE1, IE2, IE3, IE4, and
IE5.nIE4 is an approximation of super premium efficiency motors and
IE5 is the IEC designation for ultra-premium efficiency motors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that while it did not have data
to evaluate HI's part load loss model quantitatively, DOE did plot HI's
suggested model and preliminarily found the resulting trends in losses
to be reasonable in relation to the expected loss differences between
induction and synchronous electric motors. 87 FR 21268, 21298.
Specifically, HI's suggested model showed inverter-only motors to be
more efficient at part-load when compared to DOE's loss model for
induction motors. Id. Further, HI's suggested model showed higher
efficiency at full-load compared to DOE's loss model for induction
motors--an expected outcome given that induction motor efficiency is
set at a NEMA Premium level, whereas inverter-only efficiency is Super
Premium. Id.
However, DOE identified three concerns with the HI's suggested
model which it discussed in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21298.
First, the HI-provided comparison of wire-to-water test data with
results from the calculation method using the recommended coefficients
resulted in one case where the PEI rating determined using the
calculation method was lower than the PEI rating determined using the
test method. Id. Second, HI's proposed coefficients were based on a
delta between induction motors and inverter-only motors, and
[[Page 17956]]
DOE did not propose to adopt HI's proposed induction motor coefficients
in the April 2022 NOPR. Id. Third, HI's coefficients are applicable to
motor-only efficiency, while DOE's proposed test procedure for
inverter-only motors includes efficiency for the motor + inverter
combined. Id.
Therefore, DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR to make slight
modifications to the inverter-only coefficients proposed by HI. 87 FR
21268, 21298. Specifically, DOE started with the proposed revised DOE
induction motor and control coefficients, then applied the deltas
provided by HI (the difference in efficiency points between a
synchronous motor + control versus induction motor + control at
different load points and different hp ranges), and then normalized to
the motor + control losses (rather than the motor only losses). Id.
Table III.2 shows the inverter-only motor and control part-load loss
factor coefficients proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. These coefficients
result in slightly higher losses than the HI model across all hp. 87 FR
21268, 21298. DOE requested comment on its proposed inverter-only part-
load loss coefficients, specifically on the appropriateness of the
delta used to derive these coefficients as well as any other available
comparable motor data with which DOE could vet these coefficients. 87
FR 21268, 21299.
Table III.2--Proposed Inverter-Only Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coefficients for induction motor and control
part load loss factor (zi)
Motor horsepower (hp) -----------------------------------------------
a b c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5............................................................. -0.0898 1.0251 0.0667
>5 and <=20..................................................... -0.1591 1.1683 -0.0085
>20 and <=50.................................................... -0.4071 1.4028 0.0055
>50 and <=100................................................... -0.3341 1.3377 -0.0023
>100............................................................ -0.0749 1.0864 -0.0096
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Efficiency Advocates supported DOE's proposal to permit use of
a calculation-based method for pumps sold with inverter-only motors.
(Efficiency Advocates, No. 32 at p. 3) They commented that inverter-
only motors are highly efficient, and that a calculation-based method
may reduce testing burden and facilitate adoption of pumps using these
highly efficient motors. Id.
The CA IOUs supported inverter-only calculation methods discussed
in the April 2022 NOPR for inverter-only pumps and added that the
operating points are consistent with observations on field metered pump
load profiles, operating speed assumptions, and other industry
standards. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 6) The CA IOUs also agreed that the
proposed coefficients provide conservative calculation method results,
which do not exceed wire-to-water measured performance and recommended
DOE finalize the calculation method. Id. However, the CA IOUs stated
that VFD to motor harmonic losses on the order of 30 percent is higher
than standard practice or current generation products and indicated
that they plan to submit data on this topic. Id. No such data were
submitted.
While Grundfos stated that the method DOE used to determine these
coefficients is reasonable, it suggested using the manufacturer
interview process to obtain this information from specific
manufacturers under both the motor and/or pump rules. (Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 6) Grundfos stated that it follows IEC 61800-9-2 for inverter-
only motors and publishes combined motor and inverter efficiency. Id.
HI stated there is currently no standard methodology or
specification for motor manufacturers to publish efficiency on the
nameplate that includes motor and drive losses, and it is not typically
available to pump manufacturers. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI added that
some manufacturers are measuring and publishing wire-to-shaft
efficiency with inverter-only motors, but only when integrated by the
manufacturer and this information may not be on the nameplate. Id.
HI commented that the coefficients proposed by HI in response to
the April 2021 RFI added harmonic and VFD losses to the motor only
losses as defined in IEC 60034-30-2, and that HI recommended using IE4
motor efficiencies (IEC 60034-30-1) as a default for the synchronous
motors. (HI, No. 33 at p. 6) HI stated it understood that IEC 60034-30-
1 provides tables for the motor only and IEC 60034-30-2 provides a
calculation method to take IEC 60034-30-1 values and determine the
motor efficiency on the drive by applying the incremental losses
through calculation. Id. Additionally, HI responded that the
coefficients proposed by DOE are different than proposed by industry
since they start with a combined motor and VFD efficiency, and that
this value is not available to pump manufacturers and there is no
specification for manufacturers to publish these data. Id. HI
recommended that instead of using a nameplate value that is not
available to pump manufacturers, DOE (1) use the IE4 motor only
efficiencies as defaults and specify standard math to add the VFD
losses, or (2) start with IE4 motor only efficiencies and include the
VFD losses in the coefficients as proposed by HI in the April 2021 RFI.
Id.
NEEA supported the proposed calculation methodology for inverter-
only synchronous motors, but recommended DOE consider an interim
approach until these motors are covered by DOE regulations. (NEEA, No.
34 at p. 5) NEEA stated that it will take many years for the motors
test procedure, should it proceed as written, to take effect and
require testing of synchronous motors, and that this lag would cause
confusion in the marketplace and stifle adoption of new technologies.
Id. at 6. NEEA recommended that DOE incorporate by reference IEC 60034-
2-3 until DOE has regulations covering these motors. Id. NEEA added
that IEC 60034-2-3 is the most appropriate motors test procedure for
calculating full load motor efficiency values, and the values do not
include inverter losses, therefore producing reasonable full load motor
efficiency values to be used with the values DOE proposed in Table
III.2 of the pumps NOPR when calculation PERVL.\34\ Id. NEEA
further recommended that incorporation of IEC 60034-2-3 should no
longer apply when the motors are covered by DOE regulations. Id. NEEA
stated that it had no test data with
[[Page 17957]]
which to evaluate the coefficients proposed in Table III.2 in the April
2022 NOPR, but supported the method used to determine the coefficients.
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ DOE notes that Table III.2 of the April 2022 NOPR included
coefficients relative to motor + inverter efficiency, so it is not
clear what NEEA's proposal is referring to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEEA additionally recommended that in the future, DOE consider test
procedures and metrics that better account for motor and control
performance at various load points. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) NEEA stated
that as more inverter-only and synchronous motors are developed and
deployed, differentiating motor and control performance at part load
points will become increasingly important. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 7) NEEA
noted that IE5-level motors can show more variability at part-load. Id.
NEEA recommended that when IEC 61800-9-2 data are available, DOE
consider revising the pumps test procedure to incorporate the specific
losses at each load point as opposed to, or in addition to, the default
loss curves. Id. NEEA stated this would allow manufacturers to showcase
their improvements in efficiency and allow for more accurate
representation of losses Id.
On October 19, 2022, following submission of comments to the April
2022 NOPR, DOE published a final rule regarding test procedures for
motors (the ``Motors TP Final Rule''), which adopted a test procedure
for inverter-only synchronous motors generally as proposed in
accordance with IEC 61800-9-2:2017.87 FR 63588, 63659.
Since the adopted DOE test procedure for electric motors relies on
motor and inverter efficiency, and beginning 180 days following
publication of that test procedure, any representations of energy
consumption for those inverter-only synchronous electric motors must be
made in accordance with that test procedure, DOE has determined that it
would not be appropriate to have a pumps test procedure that relies on
motor only efficiency for these same motors. Instead, the pumps test
procedure should rely on motor and inverter efficiency tested in
accordance with the DOE electric motors test procedure, consistent with
the existing test procedure for pumps sold with induction motors. As
such, DOE is finalizing the pump test procedure as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR, to be based on motor and inverter efficiency rather
than motor only efficiency. DOE acknowledges that there will be a
period of time in which motor and inverter efficiency is not required
to be published by motor manufacturers, however, DOE is also declining
to develop an interim test procedure. This approach will limit
potential deviation between interim ratings and any ratings post motor-
standard, should one be finalized, which could cause market confusion,
and will allow pump manufacturers to use motor and inverter data when
available. Now that the DOE motors test procedure is final, there is
more certainty in the market than there was at the time of the April
2022 NOPR, and motor manufacturers may choose to make representations
early or upon request of their customers. DOE notes that many motor
manufacturers are currently making representations regarding the energy
efficiency of their inverter-only synchronous electric motors, and in
order to continue doing so after the 180-day mark, those
representations must be of motor and inverter efficiency in accordance
with the DOE test procedure. Therefore, DOE expects such information to
be relatively widely available. DOE is also finalizing an AEDM option
for pumps, as discussed in section III.I.2. With this option, pump
manufacturers may use their own calculation method, relying on any
available data and coefficients they have, including potentially HI or
NEEA's recommended approach, as long as such calculation meets the AEDM
requirements, as discussed in section III.1.2. In addition, as DOE
received no comment on the coefficients excluding the request to base
them on motor-only efficiency, DOE is finalizing the coefficients as
proposed.
b. Denominator for PEI Metric
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that the appropriate denominator
for pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors is the
same as for other pumps sold with motors with or without controls
(i.e., the efficiency standards for NEMA Design B motors in 10 CFR
431.25 is comparable to the PEI metric when comparing pumps across a
common baseline). 87 FR 21268, 21298. Consequently, DOE did not propose
a revision to the calculation of PERSTD for these pumps. Id.
DOE received no comments on this issue and is finalizing the
denominator as proposed.
c. Applicability
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that, to the extent that the
calculation-based method would be applicable to pumps sold with
synchronous electric motors that are inverter-only electric motors,
such provision would apply to pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous
electric motors both with and without controls. 87 FR 21268, 21299. DOE
also proposed that pumps sold with inverter-only motors with or without
controls would apply the testing-based approach in section VI of
appendix A (for pumps sold with motors and controls) rather than in
section IV of appendix A (for pumps sold with motors), given that
section VI results in PEIVL, and DOE assumed that such
pumps, even if sold without an inverter, would be tested with an
inverter. Id. DOE requested comment on its proposal to apply
PEIVL to pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous motors
without controls, including application of the testing method in
section VI of appendix A and the calculation method in section VII of
appendix A. Id.
Grundfos agreed with the proposal. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) HI
agreed with the proposal to apply PEIVL ratings to pumps
sold with inverter-only synchronous motors without controls, assuming
they would use section VII of appendix A. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) However,
HI disagreed with section VII.A.2, ``Pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors regulated by DOE's energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part,'' stating that DOE should allow
use of the calculation method using IE4 efficiency from IEC 60034-30-1,
since most (if not all) synchronous inverter-only motors will meet the
IE4 level. Id. HI also disagreed with sections V.A.2 and VII.A.3,
``SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by DOE's energy
conservation standards at Sec. 431.446 or with small non-small-
electric-motor electric motors (``SNEMs'') regulated by DOE's energy
conservation standards in subpart B of this part (but including motors
of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and continuous
controls,'' stating that DOE should continue to allow use of the
calculation method for non-DOE regulated small or SNEM motors as
referenced in previous comments by creating coefficients specific to
these motor types for section VII calculations. Id.
Based on the comments received, DOE is finalizing its proposal to
apply PEIVL to pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous
motors without controls, including application of the testing method in
section VI of appendix A and the calculation method in section VII of
appendix A. DOE has addressed HI's concern with respect to their
proposed IE4-based calculation method in section III.F.3.a of this
document and discusses the concern regarding small or SNEM motors in
section III.G of this document.
4. Pumps Sold With Submersible Motors
For pumps sold with submersible motors, the calculation of
PERSTD, the test procedure for bare pumps, the calculation-
based approach for pumps
[[Page 17958]]
sold with motors, and the calculation-based approach for pumps sold
with motors and controls all include reference to Table 2 of appendix
A, which includes default nominal full-load submersible motor
efficiency values. These motor efficiency values were developed to
allow for pumps sold with submersible motors to be rated using
calculation-based methods despite the fact that submersible motors are
not included in DOE's current motor regulations. In the Motors TP NOPR,
DOE proposed a test procedure for submersible motors based on section
34.4 of NEMA MG1-2016 with its 2018 Supplements. 86 FR 71725, 71749-
71750. DOE noted in the April 2022 NOPR that it had not established
energy conservation standards for submersible motors, and that were DOE
to establish a test procedure for submersible motors, such motors would
not be required to be tested according to the DOE test procedure until
such time that compliance with any energy conservation standards that
DOE may establish is required. 87 FR 21268, 21299.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that for the calculation-based
approaches for submersible pumps sold with motors (with or without
controls), for determination of PERCL and PERVL,
the default efficiency values in Table 2 of appendix A would be used
until compliance with an energy conservation standard for submersible
motors is required, should such a standard be established. 87 FR 21268,
21299. At such time, calculation of the pump efficiency for submersible
pumps would rely on the motor efficiency rating marked on the nameplate
and tested in accordance with the relevant DOE test procedure. Id. DOE
further proposed that if DOE finalized a test procedure for submersible
pumps, prior to any required compliance with an energy conservation
standard that DOE may establish for these pumps, a manufacturer may
rely on the motor efficiency represented by the motor manufacturer, if
such a representation were made, or the default values in Table 2 of
appendix A. Id.
DOE also proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that when determining
PERSTD using the calculation-based approach for bare pumps,
before the compliance date of any future standards for submersible
electric motors that publishes after January 1, 2021, the default
efficiency values in Table 2 of appendix A would be used. 87 FR 21268,
21299-21300. After the compliance date of any standards for submersible
electric motors that publishes after January 1, 2021, any standards
applicable to submersible motors in appendix B of part 431 would be
used. 87 FR 21268, 21300. DOE requested comment on its proposal for the
calculation-based approach for pumps sold with submersible pumps to
require use of the rated motor efficiency marked on the nameplate that
has been tested in accordance with the relevant DOE test procedure
after such time as compliance is required with an energy conservation
standard for submersible motors, should such a standard be established.
Id.
Grundfos commented that this approach would be in line with the
current requirements for pump testing using DOE regulated product and
agreed with the approach. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) However, Grundfos
stated that Section 34.4 of NEMA MG1-2016 is an inadequate test
procedure for submersible motors. Id.
HI responded that, consistent with its comments on the Motors TP
NOPR, which stated that the proposed submersible motor test procedure
was inadequate, it does not believe this language is warranted at this
time. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) Thus, HI recommended that no changes to the
test procedure for pumps sold with submersible motors be made at this
time. Id.
In the Motors TP Final Rule, DOE did not finalize a test procedure
for submersible motors. 87 FR 63588, 63605. However, DOE notes that the
proposed provision in the pumps test procedure relates to any future
standards for submersible motors, and as Grundfos stated, the approach
is in line with the current requirements for pump testing with motors
covered by DOE. As such, DOE is finalizing the provision as proposed,
noting that it will have no impact if and until a future motors
rulemaking adopts a test procedure and/or standard for submersible
motors.
G. Test Procedure for SVIL Pumps
In this final rule, DOE is expanding the scope of the test
procedure to include SVIL pumps. DOE reviewed the general pumps test
procedure as finalized in this rule to determine if any modifications
were necessary to accommodate SVIL pumps. The amended test procedure is
based on the test methods contained in HI 40.6-2021, which DOE has
determined also applies to SVIL pumps.
As discussed in section III.F, the general pumps test procedure
also contains methods to determine the appropriate PEI using either
calculation-based methods or testing-based methods. DOE has determined
that these calculation- and testing-based methods are applicable to
SVIL pumps just as they are applicable to IL pumps, based on the
configuration in which the pump is being sold (i.e., since SVIL pumps
are sold as pumps with motors or pumps with motors and controls, the
test methods enumerated in Table 1 to Appendix A apply to SVIL pumps).
Additionally, the determination of pump performance in the pumps test
procedure, as amended in this final rule, would be appropriate for SVIL
pumps.
1. Applicable Motor Regulations
The primary differences between SVIL and IL pumps affecting the
application of DOE's general pumps test procedure are the size and
certain characteristics of the motor with which the SVIL pumps are
rated. DOE notes that SVIL pumps, which this final rule defines as
pumps having shaft input power less than 1 hp, may be paired with
motors that are less than 1 hp and, as such, are not subject to DOE's
electric motor regulations specified at 10 CFR 431.25. However, some
motors less than 1 hp are subject to DOE's small electric motor
regulations specified at 10 CFR 431.446.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that its motor regulations at 10
CFR 431.446 exclude totally enclosed fan-cooled electric motors
(``TEFC'') and certain other motors considered to be non-general
purpose motors, which pump manufacturers had noted are frequently
paired with SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21301. DOE stated that in the
Motors TP NOPR, it had proposed adding such motors to the scope of
electric motors coverage under the term small non-small electric motor
electric motors (``SNEMs''). Specifically, DOE proposed to define SNEMs
as agnostic to enclosure and topology, affirmatively stating that the
proposed test procedure would apply to general-purpose, definite-
purpose, and special-purpose motors. As proposed, SNEMs would include
fractional horsepower motors as low as 0.25 hp. 86 FR 71710, 71721-
71725. The Motors TP NOPR also proposed testing instructions specific
to these motors. 86 FR 71710, 71739. DOE noted that it had not
established energy conservation standards for SNEMs, and that were DOE
to establish a test procedure for SNEMs, such motors would not be
required to test according to the DOE test procedure until such time as
compliance with any energy conservation standards be required, should
such standards be established. Under DOE's Motors TP NOPR, any
definitions, test procedures, and standards finalized for SNEMs would
be in found in subpart B of part 431. 87 FR 21268, 21301.
[[Page 17959]]
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that it expected that the
proposed definition and test procedure for SNEMs, as well as the
proposed test procedure for inverter-only synchronous electric motors,
as discussed in section III.F.3, would encompass the additional types
of motors discussed by stakeholders that are not currently covered by
the standards at 10 CFR 431.446. Therefore, DOE proposed that where the
calculation-based test methods refer to the ``represented nominal full-
load motor efficiency (i.e., nameplate/DOE-certified value),'' the
nominal full-load motor efficiency for an SVIL pump would be determined
in accordance with the applicable test procedure in 10 CFR 431.444 or
in subpart B of part 431.87 FR 21268, 21301.
DOE also proposed that for SVIL pumps, the determination of
PERSTD would reference DOE's small electric motor
regulations at 10 CFR 431.446 rather than the electric motor
regulations at 10 CFR 431.25, and would be the minimum efficiency of
the energy conservation standards for polyphase or single-phase (CSIR/
CSCR) for the relevant number of poles and motor horsepower. 87 FR
21268, 21301. The single-phase standards only apply to CSCR and CSIR
but the proposal would apply the efficiency values found at 10 CFR
431.446 when determining an SVIL pump's PERSTD. Id. DOE
stated that it believed that these values represent an appropriate
default for the SVIL market. Id. DOE also stated that it would also
consider application of efficiency values found for specific SNEMs in
subpart B of part 431, if the relevant proposed amendments contained in
the Motors TP NOPR were finalized. Id. DOE stated that its information
did not indicate that SVIL pumps are sold as bare pumps, but that if
stakeholders identify such models, DOE would include these same
provisions in the calculation method for bare pumps. Id.
DOE sought comment on whether the efficiency standards found at 10
CFR 431.446 are appropriate for use in the determination of PERSTD for
SVILs, whether certain motor topologies that would be classified as
SNEM are more prevalent and significantly less efficient, and whether
the minimum efficiency of the polyphase and CSCR/CSIR standards for the
relevant number of poles and motor horsepower is appropriate or whether
there should be differences depending on the phase of the motor with
which the pump is sold. 87 FR 21268, 21301.
HI and Grundfos stated that motor efficiencies found in 10 CFR
431.446 are not the lowest for topologies used in SVIL pumps and are
inappropriate for determining PERSTD for SVIL products. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 7; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7) HI and Grundfos stated that
DOE must create a minimum efficiency table, similar to that created for
submersible motors, to capture the minimums across the motor sizes
covered by the SVIL products. Id.
NEEA supported DOE's recommendation for the test procedure for
SVILs, but stated that they were concerned that the SNEM rulemaking
will not conclude in sufficient time to allow for incorporation of
those test procedures and standards into this rulemaking, creating a
gap during which manufacturers would not have a calculation-based
approach. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5) NEEA recommended that DOE add an
additional calculation-based approach for SVIL pumps sold with motors
not covered by the motors standard or test procedure at 10 CFR 431.446.
Id. NEEA recommended that DOE embed a calculation approach for SVILs
that uses IE2 efficiency levels to determine full load motor
efficiency, as described in IEC 60034-30-1. Id. NEEA stated that these
values are appropriate because the motors are not currently covered by
a standard, so a conservative value would use an efficiency level below
the standard for covered motors of similar sizes, and would not
disadvantage manufacturers that choose to wire-to-water test equipment.
Id. NEEA stated that once any motor TP or standard is in place and
covering additional motor types, the embedded calculation-based
methodology would no longer be valid. Id.
Following receipt of comments, DOE published the Motors TP final
rule, which adopted a test procedure for SNEMs in appendix B to subpart
B of part 431.87 FR 63588, 63657-63660. However, DOE has yet to adopt
any energy conservation standards for SNEM. As a result, there are not
currently minimum efficiency values for SNEMs on which DOE could base
the calculation of PERSTD for SVIL.
DOE acknowledges that in the proposed approach, SVIL paired with
SNEM may have worse PER ratings than SVIL paired with small electric
motors (``SEM''), given that some SNEMs currently have lower efficiency
that DOE's minimum requirements for SEMs. However, this is
representative of the energy use of such an SVIL. In addition, DOE
notes that the test procedure does not set a standard for SVIL, and
that any calculated PERSTD is just a reference point. If or
when DOE considers setting standards for SVIL, DOE may consider a PEI
other than 1.00 as appropriate for this equipment category--depending
on the timing and finalization of any DOE standards related to SNEM,
and the relationship of SNEM to SEM minimum efficiency. Therefore, HI
and Grundfos' concern regarding the lower efficiency of SNEM as
compared to SEM can be ameliorated. DOE acknowledges that motor
manufacturers will not be required to publish full-load motor
efficiency for a given SNEM until the compliance date of any standards
for SNEM. However, DOE is declining to develop an interim approach as
suggested by NEEA, and is adopting the provisions for motor efficiency
in SVIL calculations as proposed. As discussed regarding inverter-only
motors in section III.F.3, this approach will limit potential deviation
between interim ratings and ratings post motor-standard, if any, which
could cause market confusion, and will allow manufacturers to use SNEM
motor efficiency when available. Now that the DOE motors test procedure
is final, there is more certainty in the market than there was at the
time of the April 2022 NOPR, and motor manufacturers may choose to make
representations in accordance with the DOE test procedure early such as
at the request of customers, or if they are already making
representations of energy use or energy efficiency and wish to continue
doing so past the 180 day mark following publication of the DOE motors
test procedure. DOE is also finalizing an AEDM option for pumps, as
discussed in section III.I.2 of this document. With this option, pump
manufacturers may use their own calculation method, relying on any
available data and coefficients they have, including potentially NEEA's
recommended approach, as long as such calculation meets the AEDM
requirements, as discussed in section III.1.2.
Since the April 2022 NOPR, DOE has also determined through
manufacturer interviews that a small percent of pumps are sold as bare
pumps. Therefore, DOE is adopting the same provisions relevant to SVIL
in the calculation method for bare pumps.
2. SVIL Paired With Motors Less Than 0.25 Horsepower
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that its market research
indicates that the vast majority of SVILs are sold with motors with a
nominal horsepower of 0.25 hp or greater. 87 FR 21268, 21301. However,
DOE identified some models with horsepower closer to 0.125 hp. Id. Such
motors are not subject to the standards in 10 CFR 431.446 and are not
proposed to be subject to any test procedure in the Motors TP NOPR. Id.
[[Page 17960]]
DOE proposed that for determination of PERSTD for SVILs sold
with a motor nominal horsepower of less than 0.25 hp, the full-load
efficiency values in Table III.3 would be used. Id. DOE scaled these
values from the standards for 0.25 hp pumps (3.9 efficiency point
decrease, comparable to the most common decrease from 0.33 to 0.25 hp)
and taken the minimum value across polyphase and CSCR/CSIR motors. Id.
DOE also proposed that the nominal full-load motor efficiency for SVILs
would be determined in accordance with the applicable test procedure in
10 CFR 431.444 or in subpart B of part 431, although such test
procedure is not required for those motors. Id. DOE stated that it may
consider alternate methods of determining motor efficiency for motors
less than 0.25 hp, or if there is no appropriate test procedure, DOE
may consider requiring SVILs sold with such motors to use a testing-
based approach. Id. DOE sought comment on: (1) how many models of SVILs
are sold with motors with a nominal horsepower less than 0.25 hp, (2)
whether such motors could be tested in accordance with the relevant
test procedures in 10 CFR 431.446 or proposed in the Motors TP NOPR,
and if not, how such motors are tested, and (3) whether the efficiency
values in Table III.3 are appropriate for such motors, and if not, how
those values should be determined. Id.
Table III.3--Average Full Load Efficiency for SVILs Less Than 0.25 hp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average full-load efficiency
--------------------------------------------------
Motor horsepower Open motors (number of poles)
--------------------------------------------------
6 4 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<0.25........................................................ 58.3 64.6 61.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grundfos stated that SVIL sales data was provided as part of the
manufacturer interview process. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 7-8) For
testing of motors, Grundfos suggested DOE implement the process the EU
follows by publishing coefficients for these motors and allowing for
development of manufacturer specified coefficients, where required. Id.
Grundfos stated that Table III.3 using a 3.9 percent decrease is
insufficient and again recommended that DOE create a minimum efficiency
table like that for submersible motors. Id.
HI recommended that DOE reference manufacturer interviews with
regard to sales data. (HI, No. 33 at p. 7) HI did not agree with DOE's
methodology for Part 3 and the limited topologies used in the scaling.
Id. HI noted that this approach misses less efficient motor topologies
that are selected because the product's market price point. Id.
China stated that DOE did not specify the number of motor phases
applicable to SVILs less than 0.25 hp, and suggested that DOE clarify
the phase requirement for these motors and set up separate energy
efficiency indicators for motors with different phase numbers. (China,
No. 29 at p. 4)
Given that DOE is adopting the efficiencies found in 10 CFR 431.446
as discussed in section III.G.1, and for the reasons discussed in that
section, DOE is also adopting the proposed efficiencies derived from
those values as shown in Table III.3. This will allow the ratings for
SVIL with motors less than 0.25 hp to be rated consistently with SVIL
with larger motors.
DOE notes that neither Grundfos nor HI explicitly stated whether
such motors could be tested in accordance with the relevant test
procedures in 10 CFR 431.446 or proposed in the Motors TP NOPR.
Grundfos suggested that DOE publish coefficients and allow for
manufacturer specified coefficients, where necessary. (Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 7-8) DOE does not have data available with which to develop
default efficiency values for these motors. In addition, DOE notes that
manufacturers have the ability to develop their own coefficients using
an AEDM approach, as discussed in section III.I. For this reason, DOE
is adopting its proposal that the nominal full-load motor efficiency
for SVILs would be determined in accordance with the applicable test
procedure in 10 CFR 431.444 or in subpart B of part 431. DOE notes that
if this value is not available, manufacturers may choose to wire-to-
water test and/or to use an AEDM.
In response to China, the test procedure proposed in the April 2022
NOPR and adopted in this final rule does not restrict the number of
phases for motors paired with SVILs.
3. SVIL Paired With Other Motors Not Covered by DOE Regulations
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that it expected that the
existing regulations for small electric motors at 10 CFR 431.446, as
well as any finalized regulations for SNEMs and inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, would account for the vast majority of
motors sold with SVIL pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21302. However, DOE proposed
that any SVIL pumps that are distributed in commerce with motors that
are not regulated by DOE's electric motor regulations at 10 CFR 431.25,
DOE's small electric motor regulations at 10 CFR 431.446, or any
electric motor regulations in subpart B to part 431 established after
January 1, 2022, as applicable, would need to apply the testing-based
methods currently specified in sections IV and VI of appendix A and as
proposed to be modified in the proposed rule. Id. Given that DOE
proposed for PERSTD to reference motor efficiencies relevant
to SVIL pumps, DOE proposed not to have an option for SVIL pumps sold
with single-phase motors to be rated as bare pumps. Id.
If regulations for SNEMs and inverter-only synchronous electric
motors are not set, DOE stated that it may consider allowing an option
for SVIL pumps sold with single-phase motors to be rated as bare pumps.
In this case, DOE would reference the efficiency values in 10 CFR
431.446 to determine bare pump performance. 87 FR 21268, 21302.
DOE sought comment on its proposal to require testing of SVIL pumps
distributed in commerce with motors not regulated by DOE's current
electric motor regulations or any motor regulations finalized after
January 1, 2022. 87 FR 21268, 21302. DOE also sought comment on whether
it should allow such pumps to be rated as bare pumps only if any motor
regulations finalized after January 1, 2022, do not include SNEMs and
inverter-only synchronous electric motors. Id.
Grundfos stated that DOE should consider the impact of this
mandatory testing-based approach if motor regulations are not finalized
for motors used in SVIL products. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8) Grundfos
added that the testing burden would exceed the burden the inverter-only
calculation method was created to eliminate, due to the
[[Page 17961]]
basic model `band rule' and varying motor topologies used in SVIL. Id.
HI disagreed with sections V.A.2 and VII.A.3 and recommended that
DOE should continue to allow the calculation method for non-DOE
regulated small, SNEM motors, or inverter-only motors by creating
coefficients specific to these motor types for Section VII calculation.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 8)
Following comments received on the April 2022 NOPR, DOE published
the Motors TP Final Rule, which adopted test procedures for SNEM and
inverter-only synchronous motors in Appendix B to Subpart B of part
431. 87 FR 63588, 63657-63660. At the time of publication of this final
rule, DOE has not adopted any energy conservation standards for SNEM or
inverter-only synchronous motors. As discussed, DOE believes that the
test procedures for SEM, SNEM, and inverter-only synchronous motors
would account for the vast majority of motors sold with SVIL pumps. For
this reason, DOE adopts its proposal to limit the calculation methods
to SVIL sold with motors subject to a DOE test procedure, and to
require testing of SVIL pumps distributed in commerce with motors not
regulated by DOE's current electric motor regulations or any motor test
procedure and/or energy conservation standards finalized after January
1, 2022. DOE notes that such SVIL pumps could also be rated using an
AEDM, as discussed in section III.I of this document.
4. Part-Load Loss Curves
As stated in section III.F.1, the general pumps test procedure
includes calculation-based methods that specify part-load loss curves
for pumps sold with motors, accounting for the part-load losses of the
motor at each load point, as well as part-load loss curves for pumps
sold with motors and continuous controls, which account for additional
losses.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that it understood that part-
load loss curves (i.e., the variation in efficiency as a function of
load) do not vary significantly between 1 hp motors and drives and
motors and drives that are less than 1 hp. 87 FR 21268, 21302. DOE
stated that it did not receive any newer data or any indication that
the SVIL market has changed such that data collected in 2017 would no
longer be applicable. Id. DOE did not propose to revise its part-load
loss curves for motors and drives less than 5 hp. Therefore, DOE
proposed to apply the existing motor and combined motor and drive part-
load loss curves that are applicable to 1 hp motors and drives to the
fractional horsepower motors and drives with which SVIL pumps may be
sold. Id. DOE noted that IEC standards do not include motors below \3/
4\ kw (1 hp), and that many SVIL pumps may use integrated packages
rather than separate motors and drives--and may be specific to each
manufacturer. Id. Consequently, there may be more variation in losses
across manufacturers or models compared to larger hp motors and drives.
Id. As discussed in section III.I.2, DOE proposed to allow use of AEDMs
for pumps. DOE stated that in cases where a manufacturer wishes to use
an alternative to the part-load loss coefficient method, it may choose
to perform wire-to-water testing of SVILs or employ an AEDM under DOE's
proposal. Id.
DOE sought comment on whether the market for SVIL pumps has changed
such that the data collected by DOE in 2017 would no longer be
applicable, and whether the use of AEDM would address concerns related
to part-load loss curves specific to low-horsepower motors. 87 FR
21268, 21302.
Grundfos stated that data was submitted as part of the manufacturer
interview process. (Grundfos, No .31 at p. 8) Grundfos added that
because the calculated method should remain, allowing AEDM will not
solve the issue of part-load loss curves for SVIL products in the short
term. Id.
HI did not believe the market has changed since 2017, but suggested
that DOE consider manufacturer interviews. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) HI
recommended that DOE conduct research on the part load loss factors for
these lower horsepower motors to inform the calculation method. Id. HI
stated that the use of AEDM to improve the part load loss calculation
would increase burden compared to a calculation method. Id.
NEEA recommended that DOE rely on market data already in its
possession from previous rulemaking proceedings. (NEEA, No. 34 at p. 5)
NEEA stated that this data, made public in 2017, is recent enough that
it represents the current market for this pump class. Id. NEEA stated
that considering the viability of DOE's data and similarity to covered
pump classes, there is no reason to delay this rulemaking further with
an additional round of data acquisition and analysis. Id. NEEA
recommended that DOE proceed with data from 2017. Id.
DOE has not received any additional data indicating that the part-
load loss curves for SVIL with motors less than 1 hp should be any
different than those for SVIL paired with1 hp motors. Therefore, DOE is
finalizing the part-load loss curve as proposed, consistent with NEEA's
suggestion. Regarding HI and Grundfos' concern with the added burden of
an AEDM as compared to a calculation approach, as discussed previously,
an AEDM could be as simple as the calculation method that includes
different part load loss coefficients. If such data are available to
manufacturers, there should be no additional burden. If such data are
not available, manufacturers can rely on the calculation method.
H. Test Procedure for Other Expanded Scope Pumps
DOE has evaluated the amended test procedure as proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR to determine if modifications are necessary to
accommodate RSH, and VT pumps, pumps designed to operate with 6-pole
induction motors, and pumps designed to operate with non-induction
motors with an operating range greater than or equal to 960 rpm and
less than 1,440 rpm (``pumps tested with a nominal speed of 1,200
rpm''). 87 FR 21268, 21302-21303.
1. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps to HI 40.6
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that the amended
test procedure is applicable to BB, RSH, and VT pumps, as well as to
pumps tested with a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm for determining pump
performance. 87 FR 21268, 21302. As discussed in section III.C.1, DOE
is updating its test procedure to reference HI 40.6-2021. In the April
2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposed test procedure for BB,
RSH, and VT pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303. Grundfos agreed that the
proposed test procedure for BB, RSH, and VT pumps is appropriate.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8) HI commented that, in general, BB, RSH, and
VT pumps can be tested using HI 40.6-2021 without modification. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 1, 8) HI also commented that HI 40.6-2021 is fully
applicable to VS1 and VS3 \35\ pump types. (HI, No. 33 at pp. 2-3) HI
stated that in general, for any discharge through column pump, DOE must
focus on bowl or pump efficiency that excludes the column friction
losses and line-shaft bearing losses. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ VS1 and VS3 pumps are HI pump categories that meet the DOE
definition of a vertical turbine pump.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
China recommended that DOE use the current test procedure for
testing RSH pumps since RSH pumps work similarly to RSV pumps. (China,
No. 29 at p. 4) DOE interprets the comment from China to mean that the
test procedure for RSV pumps should be identical to that for
[[Page 17962]]
RSH pumps, which is consistent with DOE's proposal in the April 2022
NOPR.
The CA IOUs and China agreed that HI 40.6-2021, as written, can be
used to test between bearing pumps. (CA IOUs, No. 32 at p. 3; China,
No. 29 at p. 4) HI explained that there are two industry definitions
for determining specific speed that potentially apply to BB pumps. (HI,
No. 33 at p. 1) HI encouraged DOE to clarify in its data gathering for
BB pumps that BEP flow rate used to determine specific speed for
double-inlet impellers products is calculated using BEP flow divided by
2. Id. Further, HI stated that BB1 pumps are not as abundant as other
in-scope pumps, and there will be limited samples available for testing
of basic models. Id.
DOE acknowledges that VT pumps are sold in many configurations,
making it unrealistic to consider all potential shaft depths during
testing. To clarify DOE's intent and to reduce unnecessary test burden,
DOE is therefore revising the test procedure language proposed in the
April 2022 NOPR to explicitly state that when testing VT pumps, only
the bowl performance should be measured, as specified in section
40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
Since DOE is not including BB pumps in the scope of this test
procedure, DOE is not adopting any changes to the calculation of
specific speed.
Aside from the minor revisions discussed in the preceding
paragraphs, DOE is adopting the remainder of the test procedures for
RSH, and VT pumps, as well as to pumps tested with a nominal speed of
1,200 rpm as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
2. Testing Other Expanded Scope Pumps With Motors
As discussed in section III.F, the pumps test procedure contains
methods for determining PEI using either a calculation-based or a
testing-based method. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively
determined that these calculation- and testing-based methods are
applicable to BB, RSH, and VT pumps, as well as pumps tested with a
nominal speed of 1,200 rpm and would be applied in the same way that
they are applied to other pumps. DOE understands that the motors paired
with BB, RSH, and VT pumps are typically similar to those paired with
pumps that are currently in scope. 87 FR 21268, 21302. As such, DOE
tentatively determined that Table 1 and the relevant test and
calculation options are appropriate for these expanded scope pumps and
that no modifications are needed. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether motors
typically sold with BB, RSH and VT pumps are subject to DOE's electric
motor standards. 87 FR 21268, 21303. See 10 CFR 431.25. In response, HI
agreed that the motors sold with BB, RSH, and VT pumps are currently
regulated motors, and that Table 1 with relevant calculation and
testing options are appropriate. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8).
DOE has determined that Table 1 and the relevant test and
calculation options as adopted in this final rule are appropriate for
these expanded scope pumps.
In the April 2022 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that the existing
test procedure references to 10 CFR 431.25 for nominal full load motor
efficiencies are appropriate for 6-pole motors since 10 CFR 431.25
includes efficiencies for 6-pole motors. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
Additionally, DOE determined that the part-load loss factors in Table 4
of appendix A, as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR are appropriate. Id.
As a result, DOE did not propose to revise these references and part
load loss factors.
The current DOE test procedure references Table 2 of appendix A for
determining default full load submersible motor efficiencies. Table 2
does not currently provide default full load submersible motor
efficiencies for 6-pole motors. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to
expand Table 2 to include such values. 87 FR 21268, 21303.
DOE requested comment on its proposed default submersible motor
efficiency values for 6-pole motors in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
21268, 21303. In response, HI stated it does not have sufficient data
to provide a response since the number of 6-pole ST pumps sold is very
small and it does not expect that regulating 6-pole ST pumps will
result in any measurable energy savings (HI, No. 33 at p. 8).
DOE did not receive any alternative 6-pole motor coefficients or
data to support the development of 6-pole submersible motor
coefficients. As such, DOE is adopting the 6-pole submersible motor
coefficients as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. As discussed in
section III.F.3, Table 2 may be replaced with energy conservation
standard values for submersible motors if such standards are ever
developed and adopted.
DOE acknowledges that ST pumps that use 6-pole motors are not
common; however, to ensure consistent coverage across ST pump families,
prevent potential loopholes, and provide consumers with information to
compare the performance of these pumps, DOE is including them in the
scope of this test procedure. DOE will evaluate potential energy
savings in the ongoing pumps energy conservation standards rulemaking.
I. Sampling Plan, AEDMs, Enforcement Provisions, and Basic Model
1. Sampling Plan for Determining Represented Values
DOE currently provides sampling plans for all covered equipment
that manufacturers must use when certifying their equipment as
compliant with the relevant standards and when making written
representations of energy consumption and efficiency. (See generally 10
CFR parts 429 and 431) In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that SVIL,
RSH, VT, and BB pumps are expected to have the same testing uncertainty
and manufacturing variability as IL, RSV, ST and end-suction pumps,
respectively, since they are similar in construction and design and
would apply the same test procedure under DOE's proposal. 87 FR 21268,
21303. Additionally, DOE discussed in the April 2022 NOPR that it
expects pumps tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm would have the
same testing uncertainty and manufacturing variability as pumps that
are currently regulated and tested at nominal speeds of 1,800 rpm and
3,600 rpm. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether SVIL, BB,
RSH, VT, and pumps tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm have the same
testing uncertainty and manufacturing variability as currently
regulated pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303. DOE also requested comment on its
proposal to adopt the same statistical sampling plans which are
currently in place for commercial industrial pumps for SVIL, BB, RSH,
VT, and pumps tested at a nominal speed of 1,200 rpm. Id.
HI and Grundfos agreed that testing uncertainty and manufacturing
variability are similar for expanded-scope pumps and for those
currently in scope, and that it is reasonable to adopt the same
statistical sampling plans for the expanded-scope pumps. (HI, No. 33 at
p. 8; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 8)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the statistical sampling plans
for expanded-scope pumps (i.e., SVIL, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps) as
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR.
For purposes of certification testing, determining whether a basic
model complies with the applicable energy conservation standard is
based on
[[Page 17963]]
testing using the DOE test procedure and sampling plan. The general
sampling requirement currently applicable to all covered products and
equipment provides that a sample of sufficient size must be randomly
selected and tested to ensure compliance and that, unless otherwise
specified, a minimum of two units must be tested to certify a basic
model as compliant. 10 CFR 429.11. This minimum is implicit in the
requirement to calculate a mean--an average--that requires at least two
values. However, if only one unit of a basic model is produced, that
single unit must be tested, and the test results must demonstrate that
the basic model performs at or better than the applicable standards.
Id. Subsequently, if one or more units of the basic model are
manufactured, compliance with the default sampling and representations
provisions is required. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to expand the requirements in
10 CFR 429.11 to SVIL, BB, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps. 87 FR 21268,
21303. DOE discussed that manufacturers may need to test a sample of
more than two units depending on the variability of their sample, as
provided by the statistical sampling plan. Id.
Additionally, the current certification requirements state that
other performance parameters derived from the test procedure must be
reported, but provides no sampling plan for these other parameters,
which include: pump total head in feet at BEP and nominal speed, volume
per unit time (i.e., flow rate) in gallons per minute at BEP and
nominal speed, and calculated driver power input at each load point
(i.e., corrected to nominal speed in horsepower). 10 CFR 429.59(b)(2).
Regarding representative values other than PEI and PER, DOE
proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that if more than one unit is tested
for a given sample, represented values (other than PEI and PER) would
be determined using the arithmetic mean of the individual units. 87 FR
21268, 21303. For example, if three units are tested for a given
sample, and pump total head at BEP is measured at 99.1 ft, 96.2 ft, and
97.3 ft, the reported values for head would be the sum of the three
values divided by three (i.e., 97.5 ft). Id. This proposal applied to
both the existing and proposed expanded scope of pumps that would be
addressed by the pumps test procedure. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposed
statistical sampling procedures and representation requirements for
SVIL, BB, RSH, VT, and 1,200 rpm pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21303. Grundfos
agreed with the proposal. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) HI stated that
1,200 rpm pumps will take longer and cost more to manufacture and test
since they are physically larger pumps. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) HI
additionally commented that two samples will not be available for test
in many cases, in which case published data will be the result of a
single sample. (HI, No. 33 at p. 8) As discussed previously, the
language in 10 CFR 429.11 addresses the sampling plan for a basic model
when only a single sample is available for test. Further, as discussed
in section III.I.2, DOE is adopting AEDM provisions that allow a pump
manufacturer to certify basic models, including low-volume basic
models, using a validated AEDM.
In this final rule, DOE is adopting the statistical sampling
procedures and representation requirements for SVIL, RSH, VT, and 1,200
rpm pumps as proposed in the April 2022 NOPR. Since DOE is not
including BB pumps in the scope of this test procedure, DOE is not
adopting statistical sampling procedures for them.
2. Alternative Efficiency Determination Methods
Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 429.70, DOE may permit use
of an AEDM in cases where actual testing of regulated equipment may
present considerable burdens to a manufacturer and use of that AEDM can
reasonably predict the equipment's energy efficiency performance.
Although specific requirements vary by product or equipment, use of an
AEDM entails development of a mathematical model that estimates energy
efficiency or energy consumption characteristics of the basic model, as
would be measured by the applicable DOE test procedure. The AEDM must
be based on engineering or statistical analysis, computer simulation or
modeling, or other analytic evaluation of performance data. A
manufacturer must validate an AEDM by demonstrating that its predicted
efficiency performance of the evaluated equipment agrees with the
performance as measured by actual testing in accordance with the
applicable DOE test procedure. The validation procedure and
requirements, including the statistical tolerance, number of basic
models, and number of units tested vary by product.
Once developed, an AEDM may be used to represent the performance of
untested basic models in lieu of physical testing. Use of an AEDM for
any basic model is optional. One potential advantage of an AEDM is that
it may free a manufacturer from the burden of physical testing--but
this advantage must be weighed against the potential risk that an AEDM
may not perfectly predict performance and could result in a finding
that the equipment has an invalid rating and/or that the manufacturer
has distributed a noncompliant basic model. The manufacturer, by using
an AEDM, bears the responsibility and risk of the validity of the
ratings, including cases where the manufacturer receives and relies on
performance data for certain components from a component manufacturer.
Given stakeholder requests for the calculation methods to be more
representative, and to balance the risk of allowing overrating through
calculation methods, DOE proposed allowing manufacturers to use AEDMs
to determine performance ratings for pumps in the April 2022 NOPR. 87
FR 21268, 21304. DOE requested feedback regarding all aspects of its
proposal to permit use of an AEDM for pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21305. DOE
specifically sought comment on its proposed validation classes, and
whether groupings should be considered where performance variation
between two equipment classes or nominal speeds is well established.
Id. In addition, DOE requested comment on whether the calculation-based
methods would still be necessary if manufacturers were permitted to use
AEDMs in addition to physical testing. Id.
In the NOPR public meeting, ebm-pabst asked if it is possible to
keep AEDM information proprietary between the manufacturer and DOE or
if it would be public knowledge. (ebm-pabst, Public Meeting Transcript,
No. 35 at p. 41) DOE notes that AEDM information provided to DOE is not
publicly available.
In response to the April 2022 NOPR, HI and Grundfos supported the
use of AEDMs. (HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) However,
HI and Grundfos encouraged DOE to maintain the current calculation
option since they believe it is less burdensome than an AEDM. Id. HI
and Grundfos further stated that DOE should consider removing the
calculation methods only when AEDMs are being used by all manufacturers
for all reporting. Id. Additionally, HI and Grundfos expressed general
agreement with the proposed validation classes. Id.
The Efficiency Advocates commented that the calculation-based
approach in the DOE test method and AEDMs proposed by DOE can be used
in lieu of physical testing to help mitigate the
[[Page 17964]]
burden of testing the larger pumps. (Efficiency Advocates, No. 30 at p.
3)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting provisions in 10 CFR 429.59(i)
that allow the use of AEDMs for pumps as proposed in the April 2022
NOPR. Additionally, DOE is maintaining the calculation methods in the
test procedure.
3. Enforcement Provisions
Enforcement provisions govern the process DOE would follow when
performing an assessment of basic model compliance with standards, as
described under subpart C of part 429. Specifically, subpart C of part
429 describes the notification requirements, legal processes,
penalties, specific prohibited acts, and testing protocols related to
testing covered equipment to determine or verify compliance with
standards.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to apply the same general
enforcement provisions contained in subpart C of part 429 to the
proposed expanded scope of pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21305. Additionally, DOE
proposed in the product-specific enforcement provisions in 10 CFR
429.134(i) that DOE will test each pump unit according to the test
method specified by the manufacturer, and if the model of pump unit was
rated using an AEDM, DOE may conduct enforcement testing using either a
testing approach or calculation approach. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its enforcement
provision proposals. 87 FR 21268, 21305. In response, Grundfos agreed
with the proposal but stated that DOE needs to clearly state that
enforcement for AEDM reported products will apply the AEDM tolerances.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) Similarly, HI agreed with the standard
enforcement requirements in 10 CFR 429, subpart C for expanded scope
pumps but suggested the following modification to clause ii: DOE will
test each pump unit according to the test method specified by the
manufacturer in the certification report submitted pursuant to Sec.
429.59(b); if the model or pump unit was rated using an AEDM, DOE may
use either a testing approach or calculation approach using the basic
model tolerances found at 429.70(i)(2)(ii). (HI, No. 33 at p. 9)
In response to the comments from HI and Grundfos, DOE notes that an
AEDM is a mathematical model that a manufacturer develops to accurately
represent the tested performance of a specific pump validation class.
To validate an AEDM, the manufacturer must test at least two basic
models within a given validation class (see 10 CFR 429.70(j)(2)(i)). If
the PEI calculated by the AEDM is no more than five percent less than
the tested PEI, the AEDM has been validated (see 10 CFR
429.70(j)(2)((ii)). If the PEI calculated by the AEDM is more than five
percent less than the tested PEI, the AEDM is not validated and will
need to be revised and compared to tested results until it is not more
than five percent less than the tested PEI. For example, if tested PEI
is equal to 1.0 and AEDM results are 0.97, the AEDM would be considered
valid; however, if tested PEI is equal to 1.0 and AEDM results are
0.94, the AEDM is not valid. When certifying basic models through
testing, DOE specifies the determination of represented value in 10 CFR
429.59(a). When determining representations for basic models using an
AEDM, it is the manufacturer's responsibility to ensure that the
represented value is consistent with the requirements in 10 CFR
429.59(a).
The previous paragraph addresses manufacturer responsibilities,
specifically validation of an AEDM and represented values. DOE is also
adopting provisions at 10 CFR 429.70(j)(5) to describe how DOE may
conduct testing on individual pump models to verify basic model
compliance with an energy consumption standard. DOE emphasizes that
this compliance enforcement is separate and distinct from manufacturer
certification requirements. 10 CFR 429.7(j)(5)(v) specifies that the
result of a DOE verification test must be less than or equal to the
certified rating multiplied by (1 + the applicable tolerance), where
the applicable tolerance is 5 percent (see Table 4 to paragraph
(j)(5)(vi)). Therefore, if results of an individual model tested by DOE
are greater than 1.05 percent of a manufacturer's certified rating
(i.e., the value the manufacturer certifies to DOE), this model's
certified rating would be invalid, and DOE would pursue the actions
listed in 10 CR 429.70(j)(v). For example, if a manufacturer were to
certify a pump basic model with a PEI equal to 0.94 and DOE testing
yields a PEI of 0.97, DOE would consider the model to meet its
certified rating, since 0.97 is less than 1.05 percent of the certified
PEI value of 0.94 (1.05 multiplied by 0.94 is 0.987). However, if DOE
testing were to yield a PEI of 0.99, DOE would consider the model's
certified rating to be invalid.
In sum, DOE is adopting the five percent tolerance for both AEDM
validation and AEDM verification testing. DOE is also adopting product-
specific enforcement provisions at 10 CFR 429.134 to specify that DOE
will test each pump unit according to the test method specified by the
manufacturer, and for pumps rated using an AEDM, DOE may conduct
enforcement testing using either a testing approach or calculation
approach.
4. Basic Model Definition
As discussed in the April 2022 NOPR, pump manufacturers may elect
to group similar individual pump models within the same equipment class
into the same basic model to reduce testing burden, provided all
representations regarding the energy use of pumps within that basic
model are identical and based on the most consumptive unit. 87 FR
21268, 21305. Accordingly, manufacturers may pair a given bare pump
with several different motors (or motor and controls) and can include
all combinations under the same basic model if the certification of
energy use and all representations made by the manufacturer are based
on the most consumptive bare pump/motor (or motor and controls)
combination for each basic model and all individual models are in the
same equipment class. 86 FR 20075, 20083-20084.
In the case of pumps, ``basic model'' means all units of a given
class of pump manufactured by one manufacturer, having the same primary
energy source, and having essentially identical electrical, physical,
and functional (or hydraulic) characteristics that affect energy
consumption, energy efficiency, water consumption, or water efficiency;
and, in addition, for pumps that are subject to the standards specified
in Sec. 431.465(b), the following provisions in Sec. 431.462 apply:
(1) All variations in numbers of stages of bare RSV and ST pumps
must be considered a single basic model;
(2) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in impeller
diameter, or impeller trim, may be considered a single basic model;
and
(3) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in number of
stages or impeller diameter, and which are sold with motors (or
motors and controls) of varying horsepower may only be considered a
single basic model if:
(i) For ESCC, ESFM, IL, and RSV pumps, each motor offered in the
basic model has a nominal full load motor efficiency rated at the
Federal minimum (see the current table for NEMA Design B motors at
Sec. 431.25) or the same number of bands above the Federal minimum
for each respective motor horsepower (see Table 3 of appendix A); or
(ii) For ST pumps, each motor offered in the basic model has a
full load motor efficiency at the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency shown in Table 2 of appendix A to or
the same number of bands above the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency for each
[[Page 17965]]
respective motor horsepower (see Table 3 of appendix A).
10 CFR 431.462.
Clauses (1) and (2) of the basic model definition, which are
applicable to pumps that are subject to the standards specified in 10
CFR 431.465(b), align the scope of the ``basic model'' definition for
pumps with the requirements that testing be conducted at a certain
number of stages for RSV and ST pumps and at full impeller diameter. 10
CFR 431.462. Clause (3) of the definition, applicable to pumps that are
subject to the standards specified in 10 CFR 431.465(b), addresses
basic models inclusive of pump models for which the bare pump differs
in number of stages or impeller diameter. Id. Specifically, variation
in motor sizing (i.e., variation in the horsepower rating of the paired
motor as a result of different impeller trims or stages within a basic
model) is not a basis for requiring units to be rated as unique basic
models. However, variation in motor sizing may also be associated with
variation in motor efficiency, which is a performance characteristic;
typically, larger motors are more efficient than smaller motors. 86 FR
20075, 20084.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that for motors not currently
subject to the DOE test procedure for electric motors, it is not clear
how manufacturers would determine the full-load efficiency of a given
motor, or specifically, determine the number of bands above the Federal
minimum or, for submersible pumps, above the default efficiency. 87 FR
21268, 21306-21307. For inverter-only motors, DOE noted that the IEC
recently published an industry test procedure that provides test
methods for measuring the efficiency of these motors: IEC 60034-2-
3:2020, ``Rotating electrical machines--Part 2-3: Specific test methods
for determining losses and efficiency of converter-fed AC motors''
(``IEC 60034'') and IEC 61800-9-2:2017. Id.
DOE proposed in the April 2022 NOPR that PERSTD for
inverter-only motors would still be based on DOE's standards for NEMA
Design B motors. 87 FR 21268, 21307. Additionally, DOE proposed to
amend clause (3) for inverter-only motors so that the current band rule
does not apply, and instead the grouping can be based on anything above
the Federal minimum for NEMA Design B motors as long as the rating is
based on the lowest number of bands above the minimum. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, following consideration of stakeholder's
comments, DOE did not propose to allow the grouping of single-phase and
polyphase products into a single basic model. 87 FR 21268, 21307.
Instead, DOE proposed to require that pumps sold with single-phase
motors can continue to be rated as bare pumps (with the exception of
SVIL as discussed in section III.G). Id.
DOE requested comment on its proposed amendments to the definition
of the basic model in the April 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 21268, 21307. In
response, HI and Grundfos stated that they agreed with the proposed
amendments to the basic model but recommended adding the models in the
proposed scope expansion to the basic model definition if/when the
expanded scope pumps are added. (HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 9)
Grundfos disagreed with DOE's interpretation of how horsepower
affects multi-stage pump basic models. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 11) This
comment is discussed in detail in section III.A.4.d as it pertains to
the scope of this test procedure.
Additionally, Grundfos recommended DOE change clause (3) of the
basic model definition. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 5) Grundfos commented
that it finds certain applications of bowl assemblies could lead to a
product where both impeller trim and motor size vary. Id. Grundfos
recommended that DOE change clause (3) to read: ``Pump models for which
the bare pump differs in number of stages and/or impeller diameter . .
.'' Id. The current clause only includes ``or,'' which would imply the
only allowance is either in the number of stages or impeller trim when
it could be both. Id. DOE agrees with the clarification Grundfos offers
and is revising the definition for basic model as Grundfos recommends.
DOE will address expanded scope pumps in the basic model definition
in any future rulemaking related to the certification of these pumps.
J. Representations of Energy Use and Energy Efficiency
DOE understands manufacturers often make representations
(graphically or in numerical form) of energy use metrics, including
pump efficiency, overall (wire-to-water) efficiency, bowl efficiency,
driver power input, pump power input (brake or shaft horsepower), and/
or pump power output (hydraulic horsepower). Manufacturers often make
these representations at multiple impeller trims, operating speeds, and
number of stages for a given pump. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
to allow manufacturers to continue making these representations to
ensure consistent and standardized representations across the pump
industry. 87 FR 21268, 21308. To ensure such representations are not in
conflict with the reported PEI for any given pump model, DOE proposed
to establish optional testing procedures for these parameters that are
part of the DOE test procedure. Id. DOE also proposed that, to the
extent manufacturers wish to make representations regarding the
performance of pumps using these additional metrics, they would be
required to do so based on testing in accordance with the DOE test
procedure. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to
adopt optional test provisions for the measurement of overall (wire-to-
water) efficiency, driver power input, and/or pump power output
(hydraulic horsepower). 87 FR 21268, 21308. Grundfos commented that it
has concerns with these proposed revisions since the testing is
conducted only against a basic model and does not cover the full
performance range for all possible individual models that a basic model
represents. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9) HI agreed that representations
should be consistent, but also suggested that DOE allow pump
manufacturers to represent data over the full performance range,
including trims of the impeller and cases where the maximum or minimum
speed range is outside the rated nominal speed range (i.e., a pump
within scope but with an operating speed range that goes above 4,320
rpm). (HI, No. 33 at p. 9)
DOE also requested comment on its understanding that HI 40.6-2021
contains all the necessary methods to determine overall (wire-to-water)
efficiency, driver power input, and/or pump power output (hydraulic
horsepower) and that further specification is not necessary. HI and
Grundfos agreed that HI 40.6-2021 provides all the necessary methods.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 9; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 9)
After further review and consideration of stakeholder comments, DOE
has determined that any requirements for additional representations of
pump energy use and energy efficiency will not be addressed in the
current rulemaking. Specifically, in order to meet its stated goal of
ensuring representations of metrics other than PEI are not in conflict
with the reported PEI for any given pump model, it would only be
necessary to finalize provision related to metrics used in the
determination of PEI, which would include driver input power at load
points used in the determination of PEI. However, given that these
metrics are a component of PEI, they must
[[Page 17966]]
already be determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure
including relevant provisions of HI 40.6-2021. For these reasons, DOE
is not finalizing its proposal with respect to optional
representations.
K. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
EPCA requires that test procedures proposed by DOE not be unduly
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) The following sections
discuss DOE's evaluation of estimated costs and savings associated with
the final amendments.
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the existing test
procedure at appendix A for pumps by: (1) expanding the scope to
include SVIL pumps; (2) expanding the scope to include other specified
clean water pumps; (3) reducing the pump bowl diameter restriction to
include more ST pumps; (4) changing the definitions of ESFM and ESCC
pumps to cover all end-suction pumps; (5) incorporating a nominal speed
of 1,200 rpm, in addition to 1,800 rpm and 3,600 rpm; (6) providing a
calculation method for pumps sold with inverter-only motors; and (7)
updating the part-load loss coefficients for pumps sold with induction
motors. 87 FR 21268, 21309. DOE has determined that the test procedure
finalized in this notice will not be unduly burdensome for
manufacturers to conduct. Further discussion of the cost impacts of the
test procedure amendments are presented in the following paragraphs.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on whether pump
manufacturers had to limit any pump features due to the time and cost
of evaluating pumps performance according to DOE's current test
procedure, including, but not limited to, the nature of the features
that manufacturers have had to forego providing, the extent of the
limits that manufacturers have had to place, and the manner in which
manufacturers have had to apply these limits--such as on the basis of
intended markets (e.g., higher-end vs. budget-end). 87 FR 21268, 21309.
DOE also requested information regarding how these burdens may be
mitigated to reduce the likelihood of manufacturers having to limit the
inclusion of features with their pumps. Id.
In response, Grundfos stated it has limited modifications to and
restricted sales of certain equipment because of the testing burden
created by DOE's regulations. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) HI commented
that manufacturers have chosen to limit modifications to equipment
(i.e., new casting forms, engineered-to-order product, alternative/new
VFD or motor technology) because it poses a substantial testing burden.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 9) HI asserted that these limitations impact end
users because they result in pump manufacturers providing fewer product
offerings, and because testing results in excessive lead times. Id.
DOE notes that pump manufacturers must comply with the energy
conservation standards that were established in 2016 and required
compliance beginning on January 27, 2020. 81 FR 4368 (January 26, 2016)
(``January 2016 ECS Final Rule''). First-time compliance costs
associated with meeting those energy conservation standards included
testing costs, potential capital costs, and other one-time manufacturer
costs associated with developing a testing and certification protocol.
DOE also recognizes that the current test procedure does not provide a
calculation method for pumps sold with motors that do not have a DOE
energy efficiency standard; therefore, for pumps that rely on such
motors, wire-to-water testing is required for each basic model.
Finally, DOE notes that for all pumps currently subject to the energy
conservation standards, the applicable energy efficiency values must be
determined for all basic models according to the DOE test procedure,
which includes the calculation method for certain pumps.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE estimated a per unit test cost of
$1,600, and estimated that 59 percent of the models certified in DOE's
Compliance Certification Database (``CCD'') were certified using the
calculation-based approach. 87 FR 21268, 21309. DOE estimated that it
would take a mechanical engineer two hours to calculate and determine a
rating for each basic model. Id. Assuming a fully burdened engineering
hourly wage of $66.16,\36\ DOE estimates the labor cost of performing
the pump calculation method to be $132.31 per basic model. These cost
estimates apply to the discussion in the following sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ DOE used the mean hourly wage of $46.64, taken from BLS's
``Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2021'' using the Occupation
Profile of ``Mechanical Engineers'' (17-2141). See: www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes172141.htm. Last accessed on October 11, 2022.
Additionally, DOE used data from the ``Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation--June 2022'' to estimate that a Private
Industry Worker's wages and salary are 70.5% of an employee's total
compensation. See: www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf. Last
accessed on October 11, 2022.
Therefore, total employer hourly cost is $66.16 = $46.64 /
0.705.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has determined that the test procedure amendments in this final
rule will impact testing costs as discussed in the following sections.
a. Scope Expansion
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to expand the scope of this
test procedure to include SVIL pumps, other specified clean water
pumps, ST pumps with bowl diameters greater than 6 inches, currently
uncovered end-suction pumps, and pumps designed to operate with a 6-
pole induction motor or with a non-induction motor with an operating
range that includes speeds of rotation between 960 and 1,440 rpm. 87 FR
21268, 21273-21281. DOE also assumed a sampling plan consistent with
that for pumps currently subject to the test procedure, which requires
a sample size of at least two units per pump basic model be tested when
determining representative values of PEI, as well as other pump
performance metrics. 87 FR 21268, 21303. Additionally, DOE assumed that
manufacturers would test pumps in-house. 87 FR 21268, 21310. To test a
pump in-house, each manufacturer might have to undertake the
construction and maintenance of a test facility that is capable of
testing pumps in compliance with the test procedure, including
acquisition and calibration of any necessary measurement equipment. Id.
DOE also assumed that manufacturers have a pump test facility available
but may not have the equipment required to conduct the DOE test
procedure and that the cost of purchasing such equipment is
approximately $4,000 based on a review of available testing equipment
on the market. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE assumed that pump manufacturers who are
member companies of HI or who conduct testing in accordance with the
January 2016 Final Rule for other product offerings already conduct
testing in accordance with HI 40.6-2014, and would not incur any
additional capital expenditures to be able to conduct the proposed DOE
pump test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21310. Pump manufacturers who are not
members of HI may need to purchase electrical measurement equipment
with plus or minus 2 percent accuracy to conduct the pump test
procedure. In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE estimated that calibrating the
flowmeter, torque sensor, power quality meter, pressure transducer, and
laser tachometer, together, will cost a manufacturer about $1,250 per
year. Id.
[[Page 17967]]
DOE requested comment on its assumptions and understanding of the
anticipated impact and potential costs to pump manufacturers if DOE
expands the scope of the pumps test procedure. 87 FR 21268, 21310.
Additionally, DOE requested comment on any potential cost manufacturers
may incur, if any, from this NOPR's proposed scope expansion. Id.
In response, HI and Grundfos stated that adding additional pump
categories to the test procedure scope will increase burden on
manufactures due to annual recertification, surveillance, testing,
reporting, and documentation burden. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos,
No. 31 at p. 10) HI also commented that larger pumps with higher flow
rates within the proposed scope expansion may require different testing
infrastructure and instrumentation with substantial capital investment
required. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10) Specifically, HI stated that BB1 pumps
are considerably larger, and the cost and burden associated with
testing BB pumps will be significantly higher. (HI, No. 33 at p. 2)
Grundfos stated adding 6[hyphen]pole product requires upgrades to
testing facilities and infrastructure that will increase costs.
(Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10)
DOE acknowledges that larger pumps may require additional
investments in testing facilities. However, since no test cost data was
provided by manufacturers, DOE was unable to adjust the test cost
estimates for this final rule. DOE notes that it is not adopting the
proposal to include ST and VT pumps with bowl diameters larger than 6
inches or BB pumps in the scope of this test procedure. Therefore, the
burden associated with test facility modifications is reduced compared
to the burden associated with the proposals in the April 2022 NOPR.
b. Calculation Method for Testing Pumps With Inverter-Only Motors
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed a calculation method for
testing pumps with inverter-only motors. 87 FR 21268, 21310. The
current test procedure does not include a calculation method for motors
that do not have a DOE efficiency standard; therefore, manufacturers
are required to conduct wire-to-water testing for pumps sold with these
(i.e., inverter) motors. Aside from the proposed calculation approach,
the test procedure, metrics, and sampling plan for pumps remain
consistent with the requirements established in the January 2016 Final
Rule and, among other things, require a sample size of at least two
units per pump basic model be tested when determining representative
values of PEI, as well as other pump performance metrics.
For pumps already certified, DOE would not expect any additional
costs to manufacturers. DOE has determined that the calculation method
for inverter-only motors proposed in the April 2022 NOPR would provide
results that are conservative when compared to results from wire-to-
water testing, which is still an option in the test procedure.
Consequently, DOE does not expect manufacturers will need to rerate
their basic models. For new basic models where the bare pump is already
certified (i.e., the only change is in the inverter-only motor sold
with the pump), DOE expects manufacturer cost to be the labor required
to run the calculations (i.e., $132.32 per basic model), providing an
estimated savings of $3,070 per basic model (i.e., test cost
savings).\37\ DOE expects that there would be no change in test cost
for new bare pump basic models paired with an inverter-only motor,
since the bare pump would still need to be tested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ As previously stated, DOE estimated that the per unit test
cost is $1,600 and at least two units need to be tested. Therefore,
the calculation method is estimated to save approximately $3,070 =
($1,600 x 2)-$132.32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its assumptions
and understanding of the anticipated impact and potential cost savings
to manufacturers of pumps sold with inverter-only motors if DOE were to
adopt the proposed calculation method. 87 FR 21268, 21310.
Additionally, DOE requested comment on any potential costs or savings
that manufacturers may incur, if any, from this proposal. Id.
In response, Grundfos and HI agreed that there will be reduced
testing burden and cost savings. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31
at p. 10) HI additionally estimated that the reduction of testing
burden associated with consolidation can range from 2 to 8 basic
models. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10) HI also recommended that DOE consider
other actions to reduce test cost such as sample pumps, management of
basic models, other indirect labor, etc. Id.
DOE has concluded that the adopted calculation method for inverter-
only motors will significantly reduce test burden. DOE may consider the
additional actions to reduce test cost recommended by HI in a future
test procedure rulemaking.
c. Updated Calculation Method for Testing Pumps With Induction Motors
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed an updated calculation method
for testing pumps with induction motors. 87 FR 21268, 21310. The
updated calculation method provides less conservative part-load loss
coefficients than those provided in the current test procedure;
however, DOE tentatively determined that the coefficients would still
be conservative relative to wire-to-water testing. Id. Aside from the
updated part-load motor coefficients, the test procedure, metrics, and
sampling plan for pumps remains consistent with the requirements
established in the January 2016 Final Rule and, among other things,
requires that a sample size of at least two units per pump basic model
be tested when determining representative values of PEI, as well as
other pump performance metrics. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE also explained that, for pumps already
certified, DOE does not expect any additional costs to manufacturers
since the current calculation method provides the most conservative
results. 87 FR 21268, 21310. DOE expects that there will be no change
in test cost for new bare pump basic models paired with an induction
motor, since the bare pump will need to be tested. Id.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its assumptions
and understanding that there will be no cost impact to manufacturers if
DOE adopts the proposed updated coefficients for part-load motor
losses. 87 FR 21268, 21310. Additionally, DOE requested comment on any
potential costs or savings that manufacturers may incur, if any, from
this proposal. Id.
HI and Grundfos responded that there would be some cost to update
procedures and calculators to reflect the revised method. (HI, No. 33
at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) Specifically, Grundfos expected no
manufacturer cost savings associated with this change. (Grundfos, No.
31 at p. 10) HI said that because the revised method can provide a
better PEI, manufacturers who want to improve their PEI representation
will have costs associated with updating representations in marketing,
nameplates, and certification of data. (HI, No. 33 at p. 10)
DOE notes that it is primarily concerned with increased test costs
associated with a test procedure revision that would require
manufacturers to retest and recertify their basic models. In this case,
DOE understands that manufacturers would be voluntarily recertifying
certain basic models for marketing purposes only.
d. Additional Amendments
DOE does not anticipate that the remaining amendments, proposed in
the April 2022 NOPR and as follows, would impact test costs.
[[Page 17968]]
(1) Incorporate by reference HI 40.6-2021 into 10 CFR 431.463;
(2) Remove the incorporations by reference of ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014
and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014;
In the April 2022 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that
manufacturers would be able to rely on data generated under the current
test procedure and would not have to retest for reporting,
certification or labeling purposes. 87 FR 21268, 21310. DOE maintains
that determination in this final rule.
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
DOE's established practice is to adopt relevant industry standards
as DOE test procedures unless such methodology would be unduly
burdensome to conduct or would not produce test results that reflect
the energy efficiency, energy use, water use (as specified in EPCA) or
estimated operating costs of that product during a representative
average use cycle or period of use. See 10 CFR part 430, subpart C,
appendix A, section 8(c). In cases where the industry standard does not
meet EPCA's statutory criteria for test procedures, DOE will make
modifications through the rulemaking process to these testing standards
as needed to adopt the procedure as the DOE test procedure.
The current test procedure for pumps at subpart Y to part 431
incorporates by reference ANSI/HI 40.6-2014 for rotodynamic pump
efficiency testing and ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014
that includes pumps nomenclature and definitions. As discussed, the
amendments finalized in this rule update the DOE test procedure to
reference the most recent version of HI 40.6-2021. DOE is removing its
reference ANSI/HI 1.1-1.2-2014 and ANSI/HI 2.1-2.2-2014 since these
industry standards have been replaced by ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, which
is in turn referenced by HI 40.6-2021. The industry standards that DOE
is incorporating by reference in this document are summarized in
section IV.N of this document.
In the April 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the benefits and
burdens of the proposed updates and additions to industry standards
referenced in the test procedure for pumps. 87 FR 21268, 21311. While
DOE received no specific comments on the burdens associated with its
proposal, both HI and Grundfos recommended that DOE incorporate ANSI/HI
14.1-14.2 instead of recreating definitions for regulatory clarity.
(HI, No. 33 at p. 10; Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10) Grundfos also
recommended that DOE create its own terms when deviating from industry
terms. (Grundfos, No. 31 at p. 10)
As discussed in section III.B.2, DOE notes that its definitional
language must be clear and consistent on its own without references to
industry standards. Therefore, DOE is not referencing ANSI/HI 14.1-
14.2-2019 in its definitions.
L. Compliance Date
The effective date for the adopted test procedure amendment will be
30 days after publication of this final rule in the Federal Register.
EPCA prescribes that all representations of energy efficiency and
energy use, including those made on marketing materials and product
labels, must be made in accordance with an amended test procedure,
beginning 180 days after publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) EPCA provides an allowance for
individual manufacturers to petition DOE for an extension of the 180-
day period if the manufacturer may experience undue hardship in meeting
the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2) To receive such an extension,
petitions must be filed with DOE no later than 60 days before the end
of the 180-day period and must detail how the manufacturer will
experience undue hardship. Id.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review,'' as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011), requires
agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to (1) propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify
its costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to
quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the least burden on
society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into
account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, the costs
of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity); (4) to the
extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than specifying
the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities must
adopt; and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or providing
information upon which choices can be made by the public. DOE
emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its guidance, the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (``OIRA'') in the Office
of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has emphasized that such techniques
may include identifying changing future compliance costs that might
result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.
For the reasons stated in this preamble, this final regulatory action
is consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to OIRA for review. OIRA has
determined that this final regulatory action does not constitute a
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
Accordingly, this action was not submitted to OIRA for review under
E.O. 12866.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of a final regulatory flexibility analysis (``FRFA'') for
any final rule where the agency was first required by law to publish a
proposed rule for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the
rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order
13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,''
67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on
February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on
small entities are properly considered during the DOE rulemaking
process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available
on the Office of the General Counsel's website: www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE reviewed this final rule under the
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and
policies published on February 19, 2003. DOE has concluded that this
rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The factual basis for this certification is set forth
below.
DOE has recently conducted a focused inquiry into small business
manufacturers of the equipment covered by this rulemaking. DOE used the
Small
[[Page 17969]]
Business Administration's (``SBA'') small business size standards to
determine whether any small entities would be subject to the
requirements of the rule. The size standards are listed by North
American Industry Classification System (``NAICS'') code as well as by
industry description and are available at www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards. Manufacturing commercial and industrial pumps is
classified under NAICS 333914, ``measuring, dispensing, and other
pumping equipment manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 750
employees or fewer for an entity to be considered as a small business
for this category. DOE used available public information to identify
potential small manufacturers. DOE accessed the Compliance
Certification Database \38\ to create a list of companies that import
or otherwise manufacture the equipment covered by this rulemaking .
Once DOE created a list of potential manufacturers, DOE used market
research tools to determine whether any met the SBA's definition of a
small entity, based on the total number of employees for each company
including parent, subsidiary, and sister entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification
Database, available at: www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on DOE's analysis, 46 companies potentially selling
commercial and industrial pumps covered by this test procedure were
identified. DOE screened out companies that do not meet the small
entity definition, and additionally screened out companies that are
largely or entirely foreign-owned and operated. Of the 46 companies, 21
were therefore further identified as a small business. Based on a
review of publicly available model databases, DOE estimated the number
of models currently covered by the test procedure for each small
business, excluding four small businesses not reflected in the model
databases. DOE attributes a total of 779 unique basic models of covered
pumps to small businesses, ranging from one model to 503 models for an
average of approximately 46 models per small business. DOE was able to
find revenue estimates for all 21 small businesses.
DOE estimates that this test procedure would not require any
manufacturer to incur any additional testing burden associated with the
test procedure. If finalized, DOE recognizes that commercial and
industrial pump energy conservation standards may be proposed or
promulgated in the future and pump manufacturers would then be required
to test all covered pumps in accordance with the test procedures. (See
Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013). Therefore, although such testing is
not yet required, DOE is presenting the costs associated with testing
equipment and procedure consistent with the requirements of the test
procedure, as would be required to comply with any future energy
conservation standards for pumps. Additionally, since the list of small
businesses was drawn from manufacturers with products covered by the
previous test procedure, DOE assumes that each noted small business
already possesses the necessary equipment for testing under the test
procedure. Impacts for each test procedure amendment are reviewed
below:
SVIL Product Class Scope Expansion
DOE examined the websites and, when available, product catalogs of
all previously identified 20 potential small businesses for listings of
SVIL pumps. DOE identified two small businesses manufacturing SVIL
pumps--producing an estimated total of 65 basic models, with one small
business producing nine basic models and another producing as many as
56 basic models. DOE estimated that it would cost approximately $1,600
per unit tested--a sample of two units being required per basic model.
Accordingly, all small businesses combined would incur costs of
approximately $208,000--with the first small business incurring a cost
of $28,800 and the second incurring a cost of $179,200. However, such
testing would only be required upon the compliance date of any future
energy conservation standard for SVIL pumps.
DOE was able to find revenue estimates for both small businesses.
Testing costs for newly covered SVIL pumps represent significantly less
than one percent of estimated annual revenue for one of the small
businesses and would constitute as much as ten percent of estimated
annual revenue for the small business producing 56 models.
Other Clean Water Pump Scope Expansion
DOE examined the websites and, when available, the product catalogs
of all previously identified 21 potential small businesses for listings
of any of the clean water pumps that are newly covered under this test
procedure. DOE identified four small businesses manufacturing clean
water pumps covered by this rulemaking that are not covered by the
current test procedure. One of these manufacturers also produce SVIL
pumps. Although a newly covered model count estimate was not possible
for two small businesses, the remaining two small businesses produce an
estimated total of 37 newly covered basic models, the first producing
15 basic models and the second producing 22 newly covered basic models.
The first small business produces approximately 15 models that would
fall under the 1,200 rpm scope expansion. With the second small
business, approximately one-third of newly covered unique basic models
are submersible pumps and two-thirds are vertical turbine pumps,
several of which also fall under the 1,200 rpm scope expansion. DOE
estimated that it would cost approximately $1,600 per unit tested--a
sample of two being required per unique basic model. Accordingly, the
small businesses combined would incur costs of approximately $118,400--
with the first incurring a cost of $48,000and the second incurring a
cost of $70,400. The first small business produces both SVIL pumps and
newly covered clean water pumps and would incur an approximate total
testing cost of $76,800.
DOE was able to find revenue estimates for both small businesses.
Testing costs for newly covered clean water pumps represent
significantly less than one percent of estimated annual revenue for
both small businesses. However, such testing would only be required
upon the compliance date of any future energy conservation standard for
SVIL pumps.
Calculation Method Changes
Relative to the current test procedure calculation methodology, the
calculation changes are conservative; therefore, manufacturers would
not have to recalculate or re-rate existing models. Accordingly, DOE
does not anticipate that updating the part-load loss coefficients for
pumps sold with induction motors or providing a calculation method for
pumps sold with inverter-only motors would impose any costs on small
businesses when the test procedure is in force. Likewise, permitting
the use of AEDMs in lieu of the calculation-based test is not expected
to result in additional costs for affected small businesses, as they
will continue to be able to employ the calculation-based test.
Conclusion
DOE identified a total of five small business OEMs affected by this
final rule. The affected small businesses represent approximately 25
percent of all identified small business OEMs producing pumps covered
under this rulemaking. DOE believes this to be a substantial number of
affected small
[[Page 17970]]
entities in the context of the pumps industry. However, as noted
previously, the presented costs would not be incurred as a result of
this test procedure taking effect and are, with one exception,
estimated to constitute less than one percent of the affected small
businesses' revenue if DOE establishes energy conservation standards
for pumps not currently subject to DOE's energy conservation standards.
Based on the de minimis cost impacts, DOE certifies that this final
rule does not have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities,'' and determined that the preparation of a
FRFA is not warranted. DOE will transmit a certification and supporting
statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of pumps must certify to DOE that their products
comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. To certify
compliance, manufacturers must first obtain test data for their
products according to the DOE test procedures, including any amendments
adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for
the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered
consumer products and commercial equipment, including pumps. (See
generally 10 CFR part 429.) The collection-of-information requirement
for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and
approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This
requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910-
1400. Public reporting burden for the certification is estimated to
average 35 hours per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
DOE is not amending the certification or reporting requirements for
pumps in this final rule. Instead, DOE may consider proposals to amend
the certification requirements and reporting for pumps under a separate
rulemaking regarding appliance and equipment certification. DOE will
address changes to OMB Control Number 1910-1400 at that time, as
necessary.
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 establishes test procedure amendments that
it expects will be used to develop and implement future energy
conservation standards for pumps. 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, DOE has determined that adopting test procedures for
measuring energy efficiency of consumer products and industrial
equipment is consistent with activities identified in 10 CFR part 1021,
appendix A to subpart D, A5 and A6. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4,
1999), imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and
implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that
have federalism implications. The Executive order requires agencies to
examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any
action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and
to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The Executive order
also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.
On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the
development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE 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
[[Page 17971]]
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 12820; also available
at www.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). Pursuant
to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, Improving Implementation of the Information
Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE published updated guidelines which
are available at www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. 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 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 of energy, nor has
it been designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator
of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and,
accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788;
``FEAA'') Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where
a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the
notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and
background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE
to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal
Trade Commission (``FTC'') concerning the impact of the commercial or
industry standards on competition.
The modifications to the test procedure for pumps adopted in this
final rule incorporates testing methods contained in certain sections
of the following commercial standards: HI 40.6-2021, HI 9.6.1-2017, HI
9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data
Book, ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME
MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME MFC-22-2007, AWWA E103-2015, CSA
C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007,
ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO
5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017. DOE has evaluated these
standards and is unable to conclude whether it fully complies with the
requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA (i.e., whether it was
developed in a manner that fully provides for public participation,
comment, and review.) DOE has consulted with both the Attorney General
and the Chairman of the FTC about the impact on competition of using
the methods contained in these standards 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 Materials Incorporated by Reference
In this final rule, DOE incorporates by reference the following
standards:
(1) HI 40.6-2021. This standard establishes testing protocols for
testing of rotodynamic pumps for determination of pump efficiency in
a uniform manner.
(2) ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017. This standard, referenced in HI 40.6-2021,
applies to rotodynamic pumps and defines calculation of net positive
suction head (``NPSH'') margin and recommends NPSH margin for these
pumps based on specific application considerations, pump design, and
the flow relative to the BEP.
(3) ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and details pump piping requirements for rotodynamic pumps and
effects of inlet/outlet piping on pump performance.
(4) ANSI/HI 9.8-2018. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and discusses appropriate design for various pump intakes.
(5) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-
2021 and covers types, nomenclature, and definitions for commercial
and industrial pump types.
(6) HI Engineering Data Book--Second Edition. This document is
referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and covers fluid
[[Page 17972]]
characteristics, fluid flow, and characteristics of piping
materials.
Copies of HI 40.6-2021, ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017, ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016,
ANSI/HI 9.8-2018, ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019, and the HI Engineering Data
Book--Second Edition can be obtained from the Hydraulics Institute, 300
Interpace Parkway, Bldg. a 3rd floor, Parsippany, NJ 07054, (973) 267-
9700, or online at: pumps.org.
(7) ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-
2021 and provides information on ultrasonic flowmeters that operate
on the measurement of acoustic signal transit times.
(8) ASME MFC-3M-2004. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and specifies the geometry and method of use for pressure
differential devices (i.e., orifice, nozzle, and venturi meters) for
measuring full-pipe liquid flow in a closed conduit.
(9) ASME MFC-8M-2001. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and describes a method for connecting pressure signal transmissions
between primary and secondary devices.
(10) ASME MFC-12M-2006. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and provides information on the use of multiport averaging Pitot
head-type devices used to measure liquids and gases.
(11) ASME MFC-16-2014. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and provides information on industrial electromagnetic flowmeters
and their application in the measurement of liquid flow.
(12) ASME MFC-22-2007. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and describes the criteria for application of turbine flowmeters
with rotating blades for measuring full-pipe liquid flow through
closed conduit.
Copies of ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, and ASME MFC-8M-
2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, and ASME MFC-22-2007, can be
obtained from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Two Park
Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990, (800) 843-2763, or online at:
asme.org.
(13) AWWA E103-2015. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
provides minimum requirements for horizontal centrifugal pumps and
for vertical line-shaft pumps for installation in wells, water
treatment plants, water transmission systems, and water distribution
systems.
Copies of AWWA E103-2015 can be obtained from the American Water
Works Association, 6666 W Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (303) 794-
7711, or online at: awwa.org.
(14) CSA C390-10. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
establishes test methods, marking requirements, and energy
efficiency levels for three-phase induction motors.
Copies of CSA C390-10 can be obtained from the Canadian Standards
Association, 178 Rexdale Blvd., Toronto, ON, Canada M9W 1R3, (800) 463-
6727, or online at csagroup.org.
(15) IEEE 112-2017. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
contains instructions for conducting and reporting the more
generally applicable and acceptable tests of polyphase induction
motors and generators.
(16) IEEE 114-2010. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
contains instructions to determine the performance characteristics
of single-phase induction motors.
Copies of IEEE 112-2017 and IEEE 114-2010 can be obtained from the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane,
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4141, (732) 981-0060, or online at
standards.ieee.org.
(17) ISO 1438:2017. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
specifies methods for the measurement of water flow in open channels
using rectangular and triangular-notch (V-notch) thin-plate weirs.
(18) ISO 2186:2007. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
specifies provisions for the design, lay-out and installation for
transmitting pressure signals from a primary to a secondary device
without signal distortion.
(19) ISO 2715:2017. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021,
describes and discusses the characteristics of turbine flowmeters,
and is applicable to metering any appropriate liquid.
(20) ISO 3354:2008. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
specifies a method for the determination of the volume flow rate in
a closed conduit.
(21) ISO 3966:2020. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
specifies a method for determining volume flowrate in a closed
conduit using propeller-type current-meters.
(22) ISO 5167-1:2003. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021
and establishes methods of measuring and calculating flowrate in a
conduit using pressure differential devices (i.e., orifice plates,
nozzles, and Venturi tubes).
(23) ISO 5198:1987. This standard is referenced in HI 40.6-2021 and
specifies precision class tests (i.e., high accuracy) for testing
centrifugal, mixed flow, and axial pumps.
(24) ISO 6416:2017. HI 40.6-2021 references ISO/TR 12765 which is
identical to this standard, which describes the establishment and
operation of an ultrasonic gauging station for the continuous
measurement of discharge in a river, an open channel or a closed
conduit.
(25) ISO 20456:2017. HI 40.6-2021 references ISO 9104:1991 which has
since been revised to ISO 20456:2017, which cancels and replaces ISO
9104:1991. ISO 20456:2017 describes how industrial electromagnetic
flowmeters are used for the measurement of flowrate of a conductive
liquid in a closed conduit running full.
Copies of ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO
3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO
6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017 can be obtained from the International
Organization for Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214
Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, or online at: iso.org.
The following standards are already approved for the sections where
they appear: CSA C747-2009, FM Class Number 1319, HI 40.6-2014, HI
41.5-2022, IEEE 113-1985, IEEE 114-2010, NFPA 20-2016, NSF/ANSI 50-
2015, UL 448, and UL 1081.
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
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Small businesses.
10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation test procedures, Incorporation by
reference, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February
28, 2023, by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
[[Page 17973]]
Signed in Washington, DC, on March 15, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and
430 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; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Amend Sec. 429.59 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(2)(iv) through (vii) as paragraphs
(a)(2)(v) through (viii); and
0
c. Adding new paragraph (a)(3).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 429.59 Pumps.
* * * * *
(a) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must
determine the represented value, which includes the certified rating,
for each basic model of general purpose pump either by testing (which
includes the calculation-based methods in the test procedure), in
conjunction with the following sampling provisions, or by application
of an AEDM that meets the requirements of Sec. 429.70 and the
provisions of this section. Manufacturers must determine the
represented value, which includes the certified rating, for each basic
model of dedicated-purpose pool pump by testing, in conjunction with
the following sampling provisions. Manufacturers must update
represented values to account for any change in the applicable motor
standards in subpart B of part 431 of this chapter and certify amended
values as of the next annual certification.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) General pumps. The representative values for pump total head
in feet at BEP and nominal speed, volume per unit time in gallons per
minute at BEP and nominal speed, and calculated driver power input at
each load point must be the arithmetic mean of the value determined for
each tested unit of general pump.
* * * * *
(3) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of
testing, a represented value of efficiency or consumption for a basic
model of pump must be determined through the application of an AEDM
pursuant to the requirements of Sec. 429.70 and the provisions of this
section, where:
(i) Any represented value of energy consumption or other measure of
energy use of a basic model for which consumers would favor lower
values shall be greater than or equal to the output of the AEDM and
less than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model; and
(ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of
energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor
higher values shall be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and
greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 429.70 by adding paragraph (m) to read as follows:
Sec. 429.70 Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency and
energy use.
* * * * *
(m) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for general
pumps--(1) Criteria an AEDM must satisfy. A manufacturer may not apply
an AEDM to a basic model to determine its efficiency pursuant to this
section, unless:
(i) The AEDM is derived from a mathematical model that estimates
the energy efficiency or energy consumption characteristics of the
basic model as measured by the applicable DOE test procedure;
(ii) The AEDM is based on engineering or statistical analysis,
computer simulation or modeling, or other analytic evaluation of
performance data; and
(iii) The manufacturer has validated the AEDM, in accordance with
paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
(2) Validation of an AEDM. Before using an AEDM, the manufacturer
must validate the AEDM's accuracy and reliability as follows:
(i) AEDM overview. The manufacturer must select at least the
minimum number of basic models for each validation class specified in
paragraph (m)(2)(iv) of this section to which the particular AEDM
applies. Using the AEDM, calculate the PEI for each of the selected
basic models. Test each basic model and determine the represented
value(s) in accordance with Sec. 429.63(a). Compare the results from
the testing and the AEDM output according to paragraph (m)(2)(ii) of
this section. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the accuracy
and repeatability of the AEDM.
(ii) AEDM basic model tolerances. (A) The predicted representative
PEI for each basic model calculated by applying the AEDM may not be
more than five percent less than the represented PEI determined from
the corresponding test of the model.
(B) The predicted constant or variable load pump energy index for
each basic model calculated by applying the AEDM must meet or exceed
the applicable federal energy conservation standard.
(iii) Additional test unit requirements. (A) Each AEDM must be
supported by test data obtained from physical tests of current models;
and
(B) Test results used to validate the AEDM must meet or exceed
current, applicable Federal standards as specified in part 431 of this
chapter; and
(C) Each test must have been performed in accordance with the
applicable DOE test procedure with which compliance is required at the
time the basic models used for validation are distributed in commerce.
(iv) Pump validation classes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum number of distinct basic
Validation class models that must be tested
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Constant Load End-suction Closed- 2 Basic Models.
Coupled Pumps and Constant Load End-
suction Frame-Mounted Pumps.
(B) Variable Load End-suction Closed- 2 Basic Models.
Coupled Pumps and Variable Load End-
suction Frame-Mounted Pumps.
(C) Constant Load Inline Pumps and 2 Basic Models.
Constant Load Small Vertical Inline
Pumps.
(D) Variable Load Inline Pumps and 2 Basic Models.
Variable Load Small Vertical Inline
Pumps.
(E) Constant Load Radially-Split 2 Basic Models.
Multi-Stage Vertical Pumps and
Constant Load Radially-Split Multi-
Stage Horizonal Pumps.
(F) Variable Load Radially-Split 2 Basic Models.
Multi-Stage Vertical Pumps and
Variable Load Radially-Split Multi-
Stage Horizontal Pumps.
[[Page 17974]]
(G) Constant Load Submersible Turbine 2 Basic Models.
Pumps and Constant Load Vertical
Turbine Pumps.
(H) Variable Load Submersible Turbine 2 Basic Models.
Pumps and Variable Load Vertical
Turbine Pumps.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) AEDM records retention requirements. If a manufacturer has used
an AEDM to determine representative values pursuant to this section,
the manufacturer must have available upon request for inspection by the
Department records showing:
(i) The AEDM, including the mathematical model, the engineering or
statistical analysis, and/or computer simulation or modeling that is
the basis of the AEDM;
(ii) Regarding the units tested that were used to validate the AEDM
pursuant to paragraph (m)(2) of this section, equipment information,
complete test data, AEDM calculations, and the statistical comparisons;
and
(iii) For each basic model to which the AEDM was applied, equipment
information and AEDM calculations.
(4) Additional AEDM requirements. If requested by the Department,
the manufacturer must:
(i) Conduct simulations before representatives of the Department to
predict the performance of particular basic models of the equipment to
which the AEDM was applied;
(ii) Provide analyses of previous simulations conducted by the
manufacturer; and/or
(iii) Conduct certification testing of basic models selected by the
Department.
(5) AEDM verification testing. DOE may use the test data for a
given individual model generated pursuant to Sec. 429.104 to verify
the certified rating determined by an AEDM as long as the following
process is followed:
(i) Selection of units. DOE will obtain units for test from retail,
where available. If units cannot be obtained from retail, DOE will
request that a unit be provided by the manufacturer.
(ii) Lab requirements. DOE will conduct testing at an independent,
third-party testing facility of its choosing. In cases where no third-
party laboratory is capable of testing the equipment, it may be tested
at a manufacturer's facility upon DOE's request.
(iii) Manufacturer participation. Testing will be performed without
manufacturer representatives on-site.
(iv) Testing. All verification testing will be conducted in
accordance with the applicable DOE test procedure, as well as each of
the following to the extent that they apply:
(A) Any active test procedure waivers that have been granted for
the basic model;
(B) Any test procedure guidance that has been issued by DOE;
(C) If during test set-up or testing, the lab indicates to DOE that
it needs additional information regarding a given basic model in order
to test in accordance with the applicable DOE test procedure, DOE may
organize a meeting between DOE, the manufacturer and the lab to provide
such information.
(D) At no time during the process may the lab communicate directly
with the manufacturer without DOE present.
(v) Failure to meet certified rating. If a model's test results are
worse than its certified rating by an amount exceeding the tolerance
prescribed in paragraph (f)(5)(vi) of this section, DOE will notify the
manufacturer. DOE will provide the manufacturer with all documentation
related to the test set up, test conditions, and test results for the
unit. Within the timeframe allotted by DOE, the manufacturer may then
present all claims regarding testing validity.
(vi) Tolerances. For consumption metrics, the result from a DOE
verification test must be less than or equal to the certified rating x
(1 + the applicable tolerance).
Table 7 to Paragraph (m)(5)(vi)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Equipment Metric tolerance (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Pumps.................. Constant or Variable 5
Load Pump Energy
Index.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(vii) Invalid rating. If, following discussions with the
manufacturer and a retest where applicable, DOE determines that the
testing was conducted appropriately in accordance with the DOE test
procedure, the rating for the model will be considered invalid. The
manufacturer must conduct additional testing and re-rate and re-certify
the basic models that were rated using the AEDM based on all test data
collected, including DOE's test data.
(viii) AEDM use. This paragraph (m)(5)(viii) specifies when a
manufacturer's use of an AEDM may be restricted due to prior invalid
represented values.
(A) If DOE has determined that a manufacturer made invalid ratings
on two or more models rated using the same AEDM within a 24-month
period, the manufacturer must take the action listed in the table
corresponding to the number of invalid certified ratings. The twenty-
four month period begins with a DOE determination that a rating is
invalid through the process outlined previously. Additional invalid
ratings apply for the purposes of determining the appropriate
consequences if the subsequent determination(s) is based on selection
of a unit for testing within the twenty-four-month period (i.e.,
subsequent determinations need not be made within 24 months).
[[Page 17975]]
Table 8 to Paragraph (m)(5)(viii)(A)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of invalid certified
ratings from the same AEDM \1\
within a rolling 24-month period Required manufacturer actions
\2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2................................. Submit different test data and
reports from testing to validate
that AEDM within the validation
classes to which it is applied.\3\
Adjust the ratings as appropriate.
4................................. Conduct double the minimum number of
validation tests for the validation
classes to which the AEDM is
applied. Note, the tests required
under this paragraph (m)(5)(viii)
must be performed on different
models than the original tests
required under paragraph (m)(2) of
this section.
6................................. Conduct the minimum number of
validation tests for the validation
classes to which the AEDM is
applied at a third-party test
facility; And
Conduct additional testing, which is
equal to \1/2\ the minimum number
of validation tests for the
validation classes to which the
AEDM is applied, at either the
manufacturer's facility or a third-
party test facility, at the
manufacturer's discretion.
Note, the tests required under this
paragraph (m)(5)(viii) must be
performed on different models than
the original tests performed under
paragraph (m)(2) of this section.
> = 8............................. Manufacturer has lost privilege to
use AEDM. All ratings for models
within the validation classes to
which the AEDM applied should be
rated via testing. Distribution
cannot continue until
certification(s) are corrected to
reflect actual test data.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ``same AEDM'' means a computer simulation or mathematical model
that is identified by the manufacturer at the time of certification as
having been used to rate a model or group of models.
\2\ The twenty-four month period begins with a DOE determination that a
rating is invalid through the process outlined above. Additional
invalid ratings apply for the purposes of determining the appropriate
consequences if the subsequent determination(s) is based on testing of
a unit that was selected for testing within the twenty-four month
period (i.e., subsequent determinations need not be made within 24
months).
\3\ A manufacturer may discuss with DOE's Office of Enforcement whether
existing test data on different basic models within the validation
classes to which that specific AEDM was applied may be used to meet
this requirement.
(B) If, as a result of eight or more invalid ratings, a
manufacturer has lost the privilege of using an AEDM for rating, the
manufacturer may regain the ability to use an AEDM by:
(1) Investigating and identifying cause(s) for failures;
(2) Taking corrective action to address cause(s);
(3) Performing six new tests per validation class, a minimum of two
of which must be performed by an independent, third-party laboratory to
validate the AEDM; and
(4) Obtaining DOE authorization to resume use of the AEDM.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 429.134 is amended by revising paragraph (i)(1)(ii):
Sec. 429.134 Product-specific enforcement provisions.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) DOE will test each pump unit according to the test method
specified by the manufacturer in the certification report submitted
pursuant to Sec. 429.59(b); if the model of pump unit was rated using
an AEDM, DOE may use either a testing approach or calculation approach.
* * * * *
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
4. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
5. Amend Sec. 431.462 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text;
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Basic model'';
0
c. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``Bowl'';
0
d. Revising the definitions of ``Bowl diameter'', ``Close-coupled
pump'', ``End suction close-coupled (ESCC) pump'', ``End suction frame
mounted/own bearings (ESFM) pump'', ``End suction pump'', ``In-line
(IL) pump'', and ``Mechanically-coupled pump'';
0
e. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Radially-split,
multi-stage, horizontal, diffuser casing (RSH) pump'', ``Radially-
split, multi-stage, horizontal, end-suction diffuser casing (RSHES)
pump'', and ``Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser
casing (RSHIL) pump'';
0
f. Revising the definition of ``Radially-split, multi-stage, vertical,
in-line diffuser casing (RSV) pump'';
0
g. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Small vertical in-
line (SVIL) pump'' and ``Small vertical twin-head pump'';
0
h. Revising the definition of ``Submersible turbine (ST) pump''; and
0
i. Adding in alphabetical order a definition for ``Vertical turbine
pump''.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 431.462 Definitions.
The following definitions are applicable to this subpart, including
appendices A, B, and C. In cases where definitions reference design
intent, DOE will consider marketing materials, labels and
certifications, and equipment design to determine design intent.
* * * * *
Basic model means all units of a given class of pump manufactured
by one manufacturer, having the same primary energy source, and having
essentially identical electrical, physical, and functional (or
hydraulic) characteristics that affect energy consumption, energy
efficiency, water consumption, or water efficiency; and, in addition,
for pumps that are subject to the test procedures specified in Sec.
431.464(a), the following provisions also apply:
(1) All variations in numbers of stages of bare RSV and ST pumps
must be considered a single basic model;
(2) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in impeller
diameter and/or impeller trim, may be considered a single basic model;
and
(3) Pump models for which the bare pump differs in number of stages
and/or impeller diameter and which are sold with motors (or motors and
controls) of varying horsepower may only be considered a single basic
model if:
(i) For ESCC, ESFM, IL, and RSV pumps, each motor offered in the
basic model has a nominal full load motor efficiency rated at the
Federal minimum (see the applicable table at Sec. 431.25) or the same
number of bands above the Federal minimum for each respective motor
horsepower (see table 3 of appendix A to this subpart); or for pumps
sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors, any number of
bands above the Federal
[[Page 17976]]
minimum for each respective motor horsepower provided that the rating
is based on the lowest number of bands; or
(ii) For ST pumps, each motor offered in the basic model has a full
load motor efficiency at the default nominal full load submersible
motor efficiency shown in table 2 of appendix A to subpart Y of this
part or the same number of bands above the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency for each respective motor horsepower (see
table 3 of appendix A to this subpart) or for inverter-only synchronous
electric motors, any number of bands above the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency provided the rating is based on the
lowest number of bands.
* * * * *
Bowl means a casing in which the impeller rotates, and that directs
flow axially to the next stage or the discharge column.
Bowl diameter means the maximum dimension of an imaginary straight
line passing through and in the plane of the circular shape of the bowl
of the bare pump that is perpendicular to the pump shaft and that
intersects the outermost circular shape of the bowl of the bare pump at
both of its ends.
* * * * *
Close-coupled pump means a pump in which the driver's bearings are
designed to absorb the pump's axial load.
* * * * *
End-suction close-coupled (ESCC) pump means a close-coupled, dry
rotor, end-suction pump that has a shaft input power greater than or
equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller
diameter and that is not a dedicated-purpose pool pump.
End-suction frame mounted/own bearings (ESFM) pump means a
mechanically-coupled, dry rotor, end-suction pump that has a shaft
input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal to 200
hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and that is not a dedicated-
purpose pool pump.
End-suction pump means a single-stage, rotodynamic pump in which
the liquid enters the bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller
shaft and on the side opposite the bare pump's driver-end. The liquid
is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the shaft.
* * * * *
In-line (IL) pump means a pump that is either a twin head pump or a
single-stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that has a
shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal
to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter, in which liquid is
discharged in a plane perpendicular to the shaft. Such pumps do not
include circulator pumps.
* * * * *
Mechanically-coupled pump means a pump in which bearings external
to the driver are designed to absorb the pump's axial load.
* * * * *
Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, diffuser casing (RSH) pump
means a horizontal, multi-stage, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump:
(1) That has a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at
the number of stages required for testing;
(2) In which liquid is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the
impeller shaft;
(3) For which each stage (or bowl) consists of an impeller and
diffuser; and
(4) For which no external part of such a pump is designed to be
submerged in the pumped liquid.
Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, end-suction diffuser
casing (RSHES) pump means a RSH pump in which the liquid enters the
bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller shaft and on the side
opposite the bare pump's driver-end.
Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser casing
(RSHIL) pump means a single-axis flow RSH pump in which the liquid
enters the pump in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.
Radially-split, multi-stage, vertical, diffuser casing (RSV) pump
means a vertically suspended, multi-stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor,
rotodynamic pump:
(1) That has a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at
the number of stages required for testing;
(2) In which liquid is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the
impeller shaft;
(3) For which each stage (or bowl) consists of an impeller and
diffuser; and
(4) For which no external part of such a pump is designed to be
submerged in the pumped liquid.
* * * * *
Small vertical in-line (SVIL) pump means a small vertical twin-head
pump or a single stage, single-axis flow, dry rotor, rotodynamic pump
that:
(1) Has a shaft input power less than 1 horsepower at its BEP at
full impeller diameter; and
(2) In which liquid is discharged in a plane perpendicular to the
shaft; and
(3) Is not a circulator pump.
Small vertical twin-head pump means a dry rotor, single-axis flow,
rotodynamic pump that contains two equivalent impeller assemblies, each
of which:
(1) Contains an impeller, impeller shaft (or motor shaft in the
case of close-coupled pumps), shaft seal or packing, driver (if
present), and mechanical equipment (if present); and
(2) Has a shaft input power that is less than or equal to 1 hp at
BEP and full impeller diameter; and
(3) Has the same primary energy source (if sold with a driver) and
the same electrical, physical, and functional characteristics that
affect energy consumption or energy efficiency; and
(4) Is mounted in its own volute; and
(5) Discharges liquid through its volute and the common discharge
in a plane perpendicular to the impeller shaft.
* * * * *
Submersible turbine (ST) pump means a single-stage or multi-stage,
dry rotor, rotodynamic pump that is designed to be operated with the
motor and stage(s) fully submerged in the pumped liquid; that has a
shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and less than or equal
to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at the number of stages
required for testing; and in which each stage of this pump consists of
an impeller and diffuser, and liquid enters and exits each stage of the
bare pump in a direction parallel to the impeller shaft.
* * * * *
Vertical turbine (VT) pump means a vertically suspended, single-
stage or multi-stage, dry rotor, single inlet, rotodynamic pump:
(1) That has a shaft input power greater than or equal to 1 hp and
less than or equal to 200 hp at BEP and full impeller diameter and at
the number of stages required for testing;
(2) For which the pump driver is not designed to be submerged in
the pumped liquid;
(3) That has a single pressure containing boundary (i.e., is single
casing), which may consist of, but is not limited, to bowls, columns,
and discharge heads; and
(4) That discharges liquid through the same casing in which the
impeller shaft is contained.
* * * * *
0
6. Revise Sec. 431.463 to read as follows:
Sec. 431.463 Materials incorporated by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subpart
with the
[[Page 17977]]
approval of the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that
specified in this section, DOE must publish a document in the Federal
Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved
incorporation by reference (IBR) is available for inspection at DOE,
and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact
DOE at: the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, Sixth Floor, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-9127,
[email protected], https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/building-technologies-office. For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html or email [email protected]. The material may be
obtained from the following sources:
(b) ASME. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Two Park
Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990; (800) 843-2763; www.asme.org.
(1) ASME MFC-3M-2004 (Reaffirmed 2017) (``ASME MFC-3M-2004''),
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi,
Issued January 1, 2004; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) ANSI/ASME MFC-5M-1985 (Reaffirmed 2006) (``ASME MFC-5M-1985''),
Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using Transit-Time
Ultrasonic Flowmeters, Issued July 15, 1985; IBR approved for appendix
A to this subpart.
(3) ASME MFC-8M-2001 (Reaffirmed 2011) (``ASME MFC-8M-2001''),
Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits: Connections for Pressure Signal
Transmissions Between Primary and Secondary Devices, Issued September
1, 2001; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(4) ASME MFC-12M-2006 (Reaffirmed 2014) (``ASME MFC-12M-2006''),
Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits Using Multiport Averaging
Pitot Primary Elements, Issued October 9, 2006; IBR approved for
appendix A to this subpart.
(5) ASME MFC-16-2014, Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits
with Electromagnetic Flowmeters, Issued March 14, 2014; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(6) ASME MFC-22-2007 (Reaffirmed 2014) (``ASME MFC-22-2007''),
Measurement of Liquid by Turbine Flowmeters, Issued April 14, 2008; IBR
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(c) AWWA. American Water Works Association, Headquarters, 6666 W
Quincy Ave, Denver, CO 80235; (303) 794-7711; www.awwa.org.
(1) ANSI/AWWA E103-2015 (``AWWA E103-2015''), Horizontal and
Vertical Line-Shaft Pumps, approved 7, 2015; IBR approved for appendix
A to this subpart.
(2) [Reserved]
(d) CSA. Canadian Standards Association, 5060 Spectrum Way, Suite
100, Mississauga, Ontario, L4W 5N6, Canada; (800) 463-6727;
www.csagroup.org.
(1) CSA C390-10 Test methods, marking requirements, and energy
efficiency levels for three-phase induction motors, Updated March 2010;
IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) CSA C747-2009 (Reaffirmed 2014) (``CSA C747-2009 (RA 2014)''),
Energy efficiency test methods for small motors, CSA reaffirmed 2014;
IBR approved for appendices B and C to this subpart, as follows:
(i) Section 1, ``Scope'';
(ii) Section 3, ``Definitions'';
(iii) Section 5, ``General Test Requirements''; and
(iv) Section 6, ``Test Method.''
(e) FM. FM Global, 1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike, P.O. Box 9102,
Norwood, MA 02062; (781) 762-4300; www.fmglobal.com.
(1) FM Class Number 1319, Approval Standard for Centrifugal Fire
Pumps (Horizontal, End Suction Type), January 2015; IBR approved for
Sec. 431.462.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) HI. Hydraulic Institute, 300 Interpace Parkway, 3rd Floor,
Parsippany, NJ 07054-4406; 973-267-9700; www.Pumps.org.
(1) ANSI/HI 9.6.1-2017 (``HI 9.6.1-2017'') ``Rotodynamic Pumps--
Guideline for NPSH Margin, ANSI-approved January 6, 2017; IBR approved
for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) ANSI/HI 9.6.6-2016 (``HI 9.6.6-2016'') ``Rotodynamic Pumps for
Pump Piping, ANSI-approved March 23, 2016; IBR approved for appendix A
to this subpart.
(3) ANSI/HI 9.8-2018 (``HI 9.8-2018'') ``Rotodynamic Pumps for Pump
Intake Design, ANSI-approved January 8, 2018; IBR approved for appendix
A to this subpart.
(4) ANSI/HI 14.1-14.2-2019 (``HI 14.1-14.2-2019'') ``Rotodynamic
Pumps for Nomenclature and Definitions, ANSI-approved April 9, 2019;
IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(5) HI 40.6-2014 (``HI 40.6-2014-B''), Methods for Rotodynamic Pump
Efficiency Testing, copyright 2014, IBR approved for appendices B and C
to this subpart, excluding the following:
(i) Section 40.6.4.1 ``Vertically suspended pumps'';
(ii) Section 40.6.4.2 ``Submersible pumps'';
(iii) Section 40.6.5.3 ``Test report'';
(iv) Section 40.6.5.5 ``Test conditions'';
(v) Section 40.6.5.5.2 ``Speed of rotation during test'';
(vi) Section 40.6.6.1 ``Translation of test results to rated speed
of rotation'';
(vii) Appendix A ``Test arrangements (normative)'': A.7 ``Testing
at temperatures exceeding 30 [deg]C (86 [deg]F)''; and
(viii) Appendix B, ``Reporting of test results (normative)'').
(6) HI 40.6-2021, Hydraulic Institute Standard for Methods for
Rotodynamic Pump Efficiency Testing, approved February 17, 2021; IBR
approved for appendices A and D to this subpart.
(7) HI 41.5-2022, Hydraulic Institute Program Guideline for
Circulator Pump Energy Rating Program, approved June 16, 2022; IBR
approved for appendix D to this subpart.
(8) HI Engineering Data Book, Second Edition copyright 1990; IBR
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(g) IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.,
45 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331; (732) 981-0060;
www.ieee.org.
(1) IEEE 112-2017, IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase
Induction Motors and Generators, published February 14, 2018; IBR
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) IEEE 113-1985, IEEE Guide: Test Procedures for Direct-Current
Machines,'' copyright 1985, IBR approved for appendices B and C to this
subpart, as follows:
(i) Section 3, Electrical Measurements and Power Sources for all
Test Procedures:
(A) Section 3.1, ``Instrument Selection Factors'';
(B) Section 3.4 ``Power Measurement''; and
(C) Section 3.5 ``Power Sources'';
(ii) Section 4, Preliminary Tests:
(A) Section 4.1, Reference Conditions, Section 4.1.2, ``Ambient
Air''; and
(B) Section 4.1, Reference Conditions, Section 4.1.4 ``Direction of
Rotation''; and
(iii) Section 5, Performance Determination:
(A) Section 5.4, Efficiency, Section 5.4.1, ``Reference
Conditions''; and
(B) Section 5.4.3, Direct Measurements of Input and Output, Section
5.4.3.2 ``Dynomometer or Torquemeter Method.''
[[Page 17978]]
(3) IEEE 114-2010 (``IEEE 114-2010-A''), IEEE Standard Test
Procedure for Single-Phase Induction Motors, published December 23,
2010; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(3) IEEE 114-2010 (``IEEE 114-2010''), ``IEEE Standard Test
Procedure for Single-Phase Induction Motors,'' approved September 30,
2010, IBR approved for appendices B and C to this subpart, as follows:
(i) Section 3, ``General tests'', Section 3.2, ``Tests with load'';
(ii) Section 4 ``Testing facilities''; and
(iii) Section 5, ``Measurements'':
(A) Section 5.2 ``Mechanical measurements'';
(B) Section 5.3 ``Temperature measurements''; and
(iv) Section 6 ``Tests.''
(h) ISO. International Organization for Standardization, Chemin de
Blandonnet 8, CP 401, 1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01
11. www.iso.org.
(1) ISO 1438:2017(E) (``ISO 1438:2017''), Hydrometry--Open channel
flow measurement using thin-plate weirs, Third edition, April 2017; IBR
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(2) ISO 2186:2007(E) (``ISO 2186:2007''), Fluid flow in closed
conduits--Connections for pressure signal transmissions between primary
and secondary elements, Second edition, March 1, 2007; IBR approved for
appendix A to this subpart.
(3) ISO 2715:2017(E) (``ISO 2715:2017''), Liquid hydrocarbons--
Volumetric measurement by turbine flowmeter, Second edition, November
1, 2017; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(4) ISO 3354:2008(E) (``ISO 3354:2008''), Measurement of clean
water flow in closed conduits--Velocity-area method using current-
meters in full conduits and under regular flow conditions, Third
edition, July 15, 2008; IBR approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(5) ISO 3966:2020(E) (``ISO 3966:2020''), Measurement of fluid flow
in closed conduits--Velocity area method using Pitot static tubes,
Third edition, July 27, 2020; IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(6) ISO 5167-1:2003(E) (``ISO 5167-1:2003''), Measurement of fluid
flow by means of pressure differential devices inserted in circular
cross-section conduits running full--Part 1: General principles and
requirements, Second edition, March 1, 2003; IBR approved for appendix
A to this subpart.
(7) ISO 5198:1987(E) (``ISO 5198:1987''), Centrifugal, mixed flow
and axial pumps--Code for hydraulic performance tests--Precision class,
First edition, July 1, 1987; IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(8) ISO 6416:2017(E) (``ISO 6416:2017''), Hydrometry--Measurement
of discharge by the ultrasonic transit time (time of flight) method,
Fourth edition, October 2017; IBR approved for appendix A to this
subpart.
(9) ISO 20456:2017(E) (``ISO 20456:2017''), Measurement of fluid
flow in closed conduits--Guidance for the use of electromagnetic
flowmeters for conductive liquids, First edition, September 2017; IBR
approved for appendix A to this subpart.
(i) NFPA. National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch
Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471; (617) 770-3000; www.nfpa.org.
(1) NFPA 20 (``NFPA 20-2016''), Standard for the Installation of
Stationary Pumps for Fire Protection, 2016 Edition, approved June 15,
2015, IBR approved for Sec. 431.462.
(2) [Reserved]
(j) NSF. NSF International, 789 N. Dixboro Road, Ann Arbor, MI
48105; (743) 769-8010; www.nsf.org.
(1) NSF/ANSI 50-2015, Equipment for Swimming Pools, Spas, Hot Tubs
and Other Recreational Water Facilities, Annex C, normative Test
methods for the evaluation of centrifugal pumps, Section C.3, Self-
priming capability, ANSI-approved January 26, 2015; IBR approved for
Sec. 431.462 and appendices B and C to this subpart.
(2) [Reserved]
(k) UL. UL, 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062; (847) 272-
8800; www.ul.com.
(1) UL 448 (``ANSI/UL 448-2013''), Standard for Safety Centrifugal
Stationary Pumps for Fire-Protection Service, 10th Edition, June 8,
2007, including revisions through July 12, 2013; IBR approved for Sec.
431.462.
(2) UL 1081 (``ANSI/UL 1081-2016''), Standard for Swimming Pool
Pumps, Filters, and Chlorinators, 7th Edition, ANSI-approved October
21, 2016; IBR approved for Sec. 431.462.
0
7. Section 431.464 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through
(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 431.464 Test procedure for the measurement of energy efficiency,
energy consumption, and other performance factors of pumps.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The following categories of clean water pumps that have the
characteristics listed in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section.
(A) End suction close-coupled (ESCC);
(B) End suction frame mounted/own bearings (ESFM);
(C) In-line (IL);
(D) Radially split, multi-stage, vertical, in-line casing diffuser
(RSV); and
(E) Submersible turbine (ST) pumps.
(ii) The additional following categories of clean water pumps that
have the characteristics listed in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this
section:
(A) Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, end-suction diffuser
casing (RSHES);
(B) Radially-split, multi-stage, horizontal, in-line diffuser
casing (RSHIL);
(C) Small vertical in-line (SVIL); and
(D) Vertical Turbine (VT).
(iii) Pump characteristics:
(A) Flow rate of 25 gpm or greater at BEP and full impeller
diameter;
(B) Maximum head of 459 feet at BEP and full impeller diameter and
the number of stages required for testing (see section 1.2.2 of
appendix A of this subpart);
(C) Design temperature range wholly or partially in the range of 15
to 250 [deg]F;
(D) Designed to operate with either:
(1) A 2- or 4- or 6-pole induction motor, or
(2) A non-induction motor with a speed of rotation operating range
that includes speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 revolutions
per minute (rpm) and/or 1,440 and 2,160 rpm and/or 960 and 1,439
revolutions per minute, and in each case, the driver and impeller must
rotate at the same speed;
(E) For ST, and VT pumps, a 6-inch or smaller bowl diameter; and
(F) For ESCC, and ESFM pumps, a specific speed less than or equal
to 5,000 when calculated using U.S. customary units.
* * * * *
0
8. Appendix A to subpart Y of part 431 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the note to the beginning of the appendix;
0
b. Revising section I;
0
c. In section II,
0
i. Revising paragraphs A.1, A.2, B.1.1.1.1, B.1.2.1.2, B.1.2.1.2.1.,
and B.1.2.1.2.2; and
0
ii. Adding paragraph B.1.2.1.2.3;
0
d. In section III, revising paragraphs A through D, E.1.2.1.2,
E.1.2.1.2.1., and E.1.2.1.2.2.;
0
e. In section IV, revising paragraphs A through D;
0
f. In section V, revising paragraphs A through D, E.1.1, E.1.2.1.1,
E.1.2.1.1.1. and E.1.2.1.1.2.;
0
g. In section VI, revising paragraphs A through D;
[[Page 17979]]
0
h. In section VII,
0
i. Revising paragraphs A through D, the definition of L full
in paragraph E.1.2, paragraphs E.1.2.1, E.1.2.1.1, E.1.2.1.1.1, and
E.1.2.1.1.2,
0
ii. Adding paragraph E.1.2.1.1.3; and
0
iii. Revising paragraph E.1.2.2;
0
i. Revising Tables 2 and 4; and
0
j. Adding Table 5.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart Y of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Pumps
Note: Prior to September 20, 2023, representations with respect
to the energy use or efficiency (including compliance
certifications) of pumps specified in Sec. 431.464(a)(1)(i),
excluding pumps listed in Sec. 431.464(a)(1)(iv), must be based on
testing conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of
this appendix as they appeared in the January 1, 2022 edition of the
Code of Federal Regulations of subpart Y of part 431 in 10 CFR parts
200 through 499.
On or after September 20, 2023, representations with respect to
the energy use or efficiency (including compliance certifications)
of pumps specified in Sec. 431.464(a)(1)(i), excluding pumps listed
in Sec. 431.464(a)(1)(iv), must be based on testing conducted in
accordance with the applicable provisions of this appendix.
Any representations with respect to the energy use or efficiency
of pumps specified in Sec. 431.464(a)(1)(ii), excluding pumps
listed in Sec. 431.464(a)(1)(iv), made on or after September 20,
2023 must be made in accordance with the results of testing pursuant
to this appendix. Manufacturers must use the results of testing
under this appendix to determine compliance with any energy
conservation standards established for pumps specified in Sec.
431.464(a)(1)(ii), excluding pumps listed in Sec.
431.464(a)(1)(iv), that are published after January 1, 2022.
I. Test Procedure for Pumps
0. Incorporation by Reference.
DOE incorporated by reference in Sec. 431.463 the entire
standard for HI 40.6-2021, HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-
2018, HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data Book, ASME MFC-5M-
1985, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME
MFC-16-2014, ASME MFC-22-2007, AWWA E103-2015, CSA C390-10, IEEE
112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO
2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO
5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO 20456:2017; however, certain
enumerated provisions of HI 40.6-2021, as follows are inapplicable.
To the extent that there is a conflict between the terms or
provisions of a referenced industry standard and the CFR, the CFR
provisions control.
0.1 HI 40.6-2021
(a) Section 40.6.1 Scope
(b) Section 40.6.5.3 Test report
(c) Appendix B Reporting of test results (informative)
(d) Appendix E Testing Circulator Pumps (normative)
(e) Appendix G DOE Compared to HI 40.6 Nomenclature
0.2 [Reserved]
A. General. To determine the constant load pump energy index
(PEICL) for bare pumps and pumps sold with electric
motors or the variable load pump energy index (PEIVL) for
pumps sold with electric motors and continuous or non-continuous
controls, perform testing in accordance with HI 40.6-2021, except
section 40.6.5.3, ``Test report'', including the applicable
provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, HI 14.1-
14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data Book, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-
5M-1985, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME
MFC-22-2007, AWWA E103-2015, CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-
2010-A, ISO 1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008,
ISO 3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and
ISO 20456:2017, as referenced in HI 40.6, with the modifications and
additions as noted throughout the provisions below. Where HI 40.6-
2021 refers to ``pump,'' the term refers to the ``bare pump,'' as
defined in Sec. 431.462. Also, for the purposes of applying this
appendix, the term ``volume per unit time,'' as defined in section
40.6.2, ``Terms and definitions,'' of HI 40.6-2021 shall be deemed
to be synonymous with the term ``flow rate'' used throughout that
standard and this appendix. In addition, the specifications in
section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6-2021, ``Vertically suspended pumps,'' do
not apply to ST pumps and the performance of ST bare pumps considers
bowl performance only. However, the specifications in the first
paragraph of section 40.6.4.1 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the
applicable provisions of HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data
Book, and AWWA E103-2015, as referenced in section 40.6.4.1 of HI
40.6), ``Vertically suspended pumps,'' do apply to VT pumps and the
performance of VT bare pumps considers bowl performance only.
A.1 Scope. Section II of this appendix applies to all pumps and
describes how to calculate the pump energy index (section II.A)
based on the pump energy rating for the minimally-compliant
reference pump (PERSTD; section II.B) and the constant
load pump energy rating (PERCL) or variable load pump
energy rating (PERVL) determined in accordance with one
of sections III through VII of this appendix, based on the
configuration in which the pump is distributed in commerce and the
applicable testing method specified in sections III through VII and
as described in Table 1 of this appendix.
Table 1--Applicability of Calculation-Based and Testing-Based Test
Procedure Options Based on Pump Configuration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable test
Pump configuration Pump sub-configuration methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bare Pump..................... Bare Pump OR Pump + Section III:
Single-Phase Test Procedure
Induction Motor for Bare Pumps.
(Excluding SVIL) OR
Pump + Driver Other
Than Electric Motor.
Pump + Motor OR Pump + Motor + Pump + Motor Listed at Section IV:
Controls other than Sec. 431.25(g) OR Testing-Based
continuous or non-continuous SVIL Pump + Motor Approach for
controls (e.g., ON/OFF Covered by DOE's Test Pumps Sold with
switches). Procedure and/or Motors OR
Energy Conservation Section V:
Standards * OR Pump + Calculation-
Submersible Motor. Based Approach
for Pumps Sold
with Motors.
Pump (Including SVIL) Section IV:
+ Motor Not Covered Testing-Based
by DOE's Motor Energy Approach for
Conservation Pumps Sold with
Standards (Except Motors.
Submersible Motors)
** OR Pump (Other
than SVIL) + Single-
Phase Induction Motor
(if Section III is
not used).
Pump + Motor + Continuous Pump + Motor Listed at Section VI:
Controls OR Pump + Motor + Sec. 431.25(g) + Testing-Based
Non-Continuous Controls OR Continuous Control OR Approach for
Pump + Inverter-Only SVIL Pump + Motor Pumps Sold with
Synchronous Electric Motor Covered by DOE's Test Motors and
*** (With or Without Procedure and/or Controls OR
Controls). Energy Conservation Section VII:
Standards * + Calculation-
Continuous Control OR Based Approach
Pump + Submersible for Pumps Sold
Motor + Continuous with Motors
Control OR Pump + Controls.
Inverter-Only
Synchronous Electric
Motor *** (With or
Without Continuous
Control).
Pump + Motor Listed at Section VI:
Sec. 431.25(g) + Testing-Based
Non-Continuous Approach for
Control OR SVIL Pump Pumps Sold with
+ Motor Covered by Motors and
DOE's Test Procedure Controls.
and/or Energy
Conservation
Standards * + Non-
Continuous Control OR
Pump + Submersible
Motor + Non-
Continuous Control.
[[Page 17980]]
Pump (Including SVIL) Section VI:
+ Motor Not Covered Testing-Based
by DOE's Motor Test Approach for
Procedure and/or Pumps Sold with
Energy Conservation Motors and
Standards ** (Except Controls.
Submersible Motors) +
Continuous or Non-
Continuous Controls
OR Pump (Other than
SVIL) + Single-Phase
Induction Motor +
Continuous or Non-
Continuous Controls
(if Section III is
not used).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All references to ``Motor Covered by DOE's Motor Test Procedure and/or
Energy Conservation Standards'' refer to those listed at Sec.
431.446 of this chapter or those for Small Non-Small Electric Motor
Electric Motors (SNEMs) at Subpart B to Part 431, including motors of
such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp.
** All references to ``Motor Not Covered by DOE's Test Procedure and/or
Motor Energy Conservation Standards'' refer to motors not listed at
Sec. 431.25 of this chapter or, for SVIL, not listed at either Sec.
431.446 of this chapter or in Subpart B to Part 431 (excluding motors
of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp).
*** All references to ``Inverter-Only Synchronous Electric Motor'' refer
to inverter-only electric motors that are synchronous electric motors,
both as defined in subpart B to Part 431.
A.2 Section III of this appendix addresses the test procedure
applicable to bare pumps. This test procedure also applies to pumps
sold with drivers other than motors and ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES,
RSHIL, RSV, ST, and VT pumps sold with single-phase induction
motors.
A.3 Section IV of this appendix addresses the testing-based
approach for pumps sold with motors, which applies to all pumps sold
with electric motors, except for pumps sold with inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, but including pumps sold with single-
phase induction motors. This test procedure also applies to pumps
sold with controls other than continuous or non-continuous controls
(e.g., on/off switches).
A.4 Section V of this appendix addresses the calculation-based
approach for pumps sold with motors, which applies to:
A.4.1 Pumps sold with polyphase electric motors regulated by
DOE's energy conservation standards for electric motors at Sec.
431.25(g), and
A.4.2 SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec. 431.446 or sold with
SNEMs regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part but including motors of such
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp, and
A.4.3 Pumps sold with submersible motors.
A.5 Section VI of this appendix addresses the testing-based
approach for pumps sold with motors and controls, which applies to
all pumps sold with electric motors (including single-phase
induction motors) and continuous or non-continuous controls and to
pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors with or
without controls.
A.6 Section VII of this appendix discusses the calculation-based
approach for pumps sold with motors and controls, which applies to:
A.6.1 Pumps sold with polyphase electric motors regulated by
DOE's energy conservation standards for electric motors at Sec.
431.25(g) and continuous controls and
A.6.2 Pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part,
A.6.3 SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec. 431.446 (but including
motors of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and continuous
controls or with SNEMs regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or
energy conservation standards at subpart B of this part (but
including motors of such varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and
continuous controls, and
A.6.4 Pumps sold with submersible motors and continuous
controls.
B. Measurement Equipment.
B.1 Instrument Accuracy. For the purposes of measuring pump
power input, driver power input to the motor or controls, and pump
power output, the equipment specified in HI 40.6-2021 Appendix C
(including the applicable provisions of ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-
3M-2004, ASME MFC-8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME
MFC-22-2007, CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, ISO
1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO
3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO
20456:2017, as referenced in Appendix C of HI 40.6) necessary to
measure head, speed of rotation, flow rate, temperature, torque, and
electrical power must be used and must comply with the stated
accuracy requirements in HI 40.6-2021 Table 40.6.3.2.3 except as
noted in sections III.B, IV.B, V.B, VI.B, and VII.B of this
appendix. When more than one instrument is used to measure a given
parameter, the combined accuracy, calculated as the root sum of
squares of individual instrument accuracies, must meet the specified
accuracy requirements.
B.2 Calibration. Calibration requirements for instrumentation
are specified in Appendix D of HI 40.6-2021.
C. Test Conditions. Conduct testing at full impeller diameter in
accordance with the test conditions, stabilization requirements, and
specifications of HI 40.6-2021 Section 40.6.3, ``Pump efficiency
testing;'' Section 40.6.4, ``Considerations when determining the
efficiency of certain pumps'' including the applicable provisions of
HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI Engineering Data Book, and AWWA E103-2015,
as referenced in section 40.6.4 of HI 40.6; section 40.6.5.4
(including appendix A), ``Test arrangements,'' including the
applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018,
HI Engineering Data Book, and AWWA E103-2015 as referenced in
appendix A of HI 40.6; and section 40.6.5.5, ``Test conditions''
including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as referenced
in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021. For ST pumps, head
measurements must be based on the bowl assembly total head as
described in section A.5 of 40.6-2021, including the applicable
provisions of the HI Engineering Data Book and AWWA E103-2015 as
referenced in ins section A.5 of HI 40.6-2021, and the pump power
input or driver power input, as applicable, must be based on the
measured input power to the driver or bare pump, respectively;
section 40.6.4.1, ``Vertically suspended pumps,'' does not apply to
ST pumps.
C.1 Nominal Speed of Rotation. Determine the nominal speed of
rotation based on the range of speeds of rotation at which the pump
is designed to operate, in accordance with sections I.C.1.1,
I.C.1.2, and I.C.1.3 of this appendix, as applicable. When
determining the range of speeds at which the pump is designed to
operate, DOE will refer to published data, marketing literature, and
other publicly-available information about the pump model and motor,
as applicable.
C.1.1 For pumps sold without motors, select the nominal speed of
rotation based on the speed for which the pump is designed.
C.1.1.1 For bare pumps designed for speeds of rotation including
2,880 to 4,320 revolutions per minute (rpm), the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
C.1.1.2 For bare pumps designed for speeds of rotation including
1,440 to 2,160 rpm, the nominal speed of rotation shall be 1,800
rpm.
C.1.1.3 For bare pumps designed for speeds of rotation including
960 to 1,439 rpm, the nominal speed of rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
C.1.2 For pumps sold with induction motors, select the
appropriate nominal speed of rotation.
C.1.2.1 For pumps sold with 6-pole induction motors, the nominal
speed of rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
C.1.2.2 For pumps sold with 4-pole induction motors, the nominal
speed of rotation shall be 1,800 rpm.
[[Page 17981]]
C.1.2.3 For pumps sold with 2-pole induction motors, the nominal
speed of rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
C.1.3 For pumps sold with non-induction motors, select the
appropriate nominal speed of rotation.
C.1.3.1 Where the operating range of the pump and motor includes
speeds of rotation between 2,880 and 4,320 rpm, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 3,600 rpm.
C.1.3.2 Where the operating range of the pump and motor includes
speeds of rotation between 1,440 and 2,160 rpm, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 1,800 rpm.
C.1.3.3 Where the operating range of the pump and motor includes
speeds of rotation between 960 and 1,439, the nominal speed of
rotation shall be 1,200 rpm.
C.2 Multi-Stage Pumps. Perform testing on the pump with three
stages for RSH and RSV pumps, and nine stages for ST and VT pumps.
If the basic model of pump being tested is only available with fewer
than the required number of stages, test the pump with the maximum
number of stages with which the basic model is distributed in
commerce in the United States. If the basic model of pump being
tested is only available with greater than the required number of
stages, test the pump with the lowest number of stages with which
the basic model is distributed in commerce in the United States. If
the basic model of pump being tested is available with both fewer
and greater than the required number of stages, but not the required
number of stages, test the pump with the number of stages closest to
the required number of stages. If both the next lower and next
higher number of stages are equivalently close to the required
number of stages, test the pump with the next higher number of
stages.
C.3 Twin-Head Pumps. For twin-head pumps, perform testing on an
equivalent single impeller IL or SVIL pump as applicable,
constructed by incorporating one of the driver and impeller
assemblies of the twin-head pump being rated into an adequate IL-
style or SVIL-style, single impeller volute and casing. An adequate
IL-style or SVIL-style, single impeller volute and casing means a
volute and casing for which any physical and functional
characteristics that affect energy consumption and energy efficiency
are the same as their corresponding characteristics for a single
impeller in the twin-head pump volute and casing.
D. Data Collection and Analysis.
D.1 Damping Devices. Use of damping devices, as described in
section 40.6.3.2.2 of HI 40.6-2021, are only permitted to integrate
up to the data collection interval used during testing.
D.2 Stabilization. Record data at any tested load point only
under stabilized conditions, as defined in HI 40.6-2021 section
40.6.5.5.1, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6, where a minimum of two
measurements are used to determine stabilization.
D.3 Calculations and Rounding. Normalize all measured data to
the nominal speed of rotation of 3,600 or 1,800 or 1,200 rpm based
on the nominal speed of rotation selected for the pump in section
I.C.1 of this appendix, in accordance with the procedures specified
in section 40.6.6.1.1 of HI 40.6-2021. Except for the ``expected BEP
flow rate,'' all terms and quantities refer to values determined in
accordance with the procedures set forth in this appendix for the
rated pump. Perform all calculations using raw measured values
without rounding. Round PER CL and PER VL to
three significant digits, and round PEI CL, and PEI
VL values, as applicable, to the hundredths place (i.e.,
0.01).
D.4 Pumps with BEP at Run Out. Test pumps for which the expected
BEP corresponds to a volume rate of flow that is within 20 percent
of the expected maximum flow rate at which the pump is designed to
operate continuously or safely (i.e., pumps with BEP at run-out) in
accordance with the test procedure specified in this appendix, but
with the following exceptions:
D.4.1 Use the following seven flow points--40, 50, 60, 70, 80,
90, and 100 percent of the expected maximum flow rate for
determination of BEP in sections III.D, IV.D, V.D, VI.D, and VII.D
of this appendix instead of the flow points specified in those
sections.
D.4.2 Use flow points of 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100 percent of the
expected maximum flow rate of the pump to determine pump power input
or driver power input instead of the flow points of 60, 75, 90, 100,
110, and 120 percent of the expected BEP flow rate specified in
sections III.E.1.1, IV.E.1, V.E.1.1, VI.E.1, and VII.E.1.1 of this
appendix.
D.4.3 To determine PER CL in sections III.E, IV.E,
and V.E and to determine PER STD in section II.B, use
load points of 65, 90, and 100 percent of the BEP flow rate
determined with the modified flow points specified in this section
I.D.4 of this appendix instead of 75, 100, and 110 percent of BEP
flow. In section II.B.1.1, where alpha values are specified for the
load points 75, 100, and 110 percent of BEP flow rate, instead apply
the alpha values to the load points of 65, 90, and 100 percent of
the BEP flow rate determined with the modified flow points specified
in this section I.D.4 of this appendix. However, in sections
II.B.1.1.1 and II.B.1.1.1.1 of this appendix, use 100 percent of the
BEP flow rate as specified to determine [eta]pump,STD and
Ns as specified. To determine motor sizing for bare pumps in
sections II.B.1.2.1.1 and III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, use a load
point of 100 percent of the BEP flow rate instead of 120 percent.
II. Calculation of the Pump Energy Index
A. * * *
A.1. For pumps rated as bare pumps or pumps sold with motors
(other than inverter-only synchronous electric motors), determine
the PEI CL using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.004
Where:
PEI CL = the pump energy index for a constant load (hp),
PER CL = the pump energy rating for a constant load (hp),
determined in accordance with either section III (for bare pumps;
ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, ST or VT pumps sold with single-
phase induction motors; and pumps sold with drivers other than
electric motors), section IV (for pumps sold with motors and rated
using the testing-based approach), or section V (for pumps sold with
motors and rated using the calculation-based approach) of this
appendix, and
PER STD = the PER CL for a pump that is
minimally compliant with DOE's energy conservation standards with
the same flow and specific speed characteristics as the tested pump
(hp), as determined in accordance with section II.B of this
appendix.
A.2 For pumps rated as pumps sold with motors and continuous
controls or non-continuous controls (including pumps sold with
inverter-only synchronous electric motors with or without controls),
determine the PEI VL using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.005
PEI VL = the pump energy index for a variable load (hp),
PER VL = the pump energy rating for a variable load (hp),
determined in accordance with section VI (for pumps sold with motors
and continuous or non-continuous controls rated using the testing-
based approach) or section VII of this appendix (for pumps sold with
motors and continuous controls rated using the calculation-based
approach), and
PER STD = the PER CL for a pump that is
minimally compliant with DOE's energy conservation standards with
the same flow and specific speed characteristics as the tested pump
(hp), as determined in accordance with section II.B of this
appendix.
B. * * *
B.1.1.1.1 Determine the specific speed of the rated pump using
the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.006
Where:
Ns = specific speed,
nsp = the nominal speed of rotation (rpm),
Q'100 = the measured BEP flow rate of the tested
pump at full impeller and nominal speed of rotation (gpm),
H100 = pump total head at 100 percent of the BEP
flow rate of the tested pump at full impeller and nominal speed of
rotation (ft), and
S = the number of stages with which the pump is being rated
B.1.2.1.2 Determine the default nominal full load motor efficiency
as described in
[[Page 17982]]
section II.B.1.2.1.2.1 of this appendix for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES,
RSHIL, RSV, and VT pumps; section II.B.1.2.1.2.2 of this appendix
for ST pumps; and section II.B.1.2.1.2.3 for SVIL pumps.
B.1.2.1.2.1. For ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and VT
pumps, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the minimum
of the nominal full load motor efficiency standards (open or
enclosed) from the table containing the current energy conservation
standards for NEMA Design B motors at Sec. 431.25, with the number
of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being tested
(see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
B.1.2.1.2.2. For ST pumps, prior to the compliance date of any
energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart B of
this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the
default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency listed in
table 2 of this appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the
speed at which the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower determined in section
II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix. Starting on the compliance date of
any energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart
B of this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency shall
be the minimum of any nominal full load motor efficiency standard
from the table containing energy conservation standards for
submersible motors in subpart B of this part, with the number of
poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being tested (see
section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower determined
in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
B.1.2.1.2.3. For SVIL pumps, the default nominal full load motor
efficiency is the minimum full load motor efficiency standard from
the tables containing the current energy conservation standards for
polyphase or CSCR/CSIR small electric motors at Sec. 431.446, with
the number of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being
tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section II.B.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, or for SVIL
pumps sold with motors less than 0.25 hp, the default nominal full
load motor efficiency is 58.3% for 6-pole, 64.6% for 4-pole, and
61.7% for 2-pole motors.
* * * * *
III. Test Procedure for Bare Pumps
A. Scope. This section III applies only to:
A.1 Bare pumps,
A.2 Pumps sold with drivers other than electric motors, and
A.3 ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, ST, and VT pumps sold
with single-phase induction motors.
B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this
section III. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section III.
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021 shall be met,
including the applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017,
IEEE 114-2010-A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section
40.6.6.2 of HI 40.6-2021.
* * * * *
E.1.2.1.2 Determine the default nominal full load motor
efficiency as described in section III.E.1.2.1.2.1 of this appendix
for ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and VT pumps; or section
III.E.1.2.1.2.2. of this appendix for ST pumps; or section
III.E.1.2.1.2.3 of this appendix for SVIL pumps.
E.1.2.1.2.1. For ESCC, ESFM, IL, RSHES, RSHIL, RSV, and VT
pumps, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the minimum
of the nominal full load motor efficiency standards (open or
enclosed) from the table containing the current energy conservation
standards for NEMA Design B motors at Sec. 431.25, with the number
of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being tested
(see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
E.1.2.1.2.2. For ST pumps, prior to the compliance date of any
energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart B of
this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is the
default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency listed in
table 2 of this appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the
speed at which the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this
appendix) and the motor horsepower determined in section
III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix. Starting on the compliance date of
any energy conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart
B of this part, the default nominal full load motor efficiency is
the minimum of any nominal full load motor efficiency standard from
the table containing energy conservation standards for submersible
motors in subpart B of this part, with the number of poles relevant
to the speed at which the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of
this appendix) and the motor horsepower determined in accordance
with section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix.
E.1.2.1.2.3. For SVIL pumps, the default nominal full load motor
efficiency is the minimum full load motor efficiency standard from
the tables containing the current energy conservation standards for
polyphase or CSCR/CSIR small electric motors at Sec. 431.446, with
the number of poles relevant to the speed at which the pump is being
tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and the motor horsepower
determined in section III.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix, or for SVIL
pumps sold with motors less than 0.25 hp, the default nominal full
load motor efficiency is 58.3% for 6-pole, 64.6% for 4-pole, and
61.7% for 2-pole motors.
* * * * *
IV. Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors
A. Scope. This section IV applies only to pumps sold with
electric motors (excluding pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous
electric motors regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy
conservation standards in subpart B of this part), including single-
phase induction motors.
B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this
section IV. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section IV.
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in Section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6, shall be met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the
operating point of maximum
[[Page 17983]]
pump efficiency on the pump efficiency curve, as determined in
accordance with Section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-2021, where the pump
efficiency is the ratio of the pump power output divided by the pump
power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2 of HI 40.6-2021,
disregarding the calculations provided in section 40.6.6.2 of HI
40.6-2021.
* * * * *
V. Calculation-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors
A. Scope. This section V can only be used in lieu of the test
method in section IV of this appendix to calculate the index for
pumps sold with motors listed in section V.A.1, V.A.2, or V.A.3 of
this appendix.
A.1 Pumps sold with motors subject to DOE's energy conservation
standards for polyphase electric motors at Sec. 431.25(g),
A.2 SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec. 431.446 or with SNEMs
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part but including motors of such
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp, and
A.3. Pumps sold with submersible motors.
A.4. Pumps sold with motors not listed in sections V.A.1, V.A.2,
or V.A.3 of this appendix cannot use this section V and must apply
the test method in section IV of this appendix.
B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this
section V. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor,
electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements of
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable provisions
of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as referenced in
section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall be determined
according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and meet the
requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section V.
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021 shall be met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section
40.6.6.2.
* * * * *
E.1.1 Determine the pump power input at 75, 100, and 110 percent
of the BEP flow rate by employing a least squares regression to
determine a linear relationship between the pump power input at the
nominal speed of rotation of the pump and the measured flow rate at
the following load points: 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120 percent of
the expected BEP flow rate. Use the linear relationship to determine
the pump power input at the nominal speed of rotation for the load
points of 75, 100, and 110 percent of the BEP flow rate.
* * * * *
E.1.2.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than submersible
motors, determine the represented nominal full load motor efficiency
as described in section V.E.1.2.1.1.1 of this appendix. For pumps
sold with submersible motors, determine the default nominal full
load submersible motor efficiency as described in section
V.E.1.2.1.1.2 of this appendix.
E.1.2.1.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than submersible
motors, the represented nominal full load motor efficiency is that
of the motor with which the given pump model is being tested, as
determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure for electric
motors at Sec. 431.16 or, for SVIL, the DOE test procedure for
small electric motors at Sec. 431.444, or the DOE test procedure
for SNEMs in subpart B to this part, as applicable (including for
motors less than 0.25 hp), and if available, applicable
representation procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part.
E.1.2.1.1.2 For pumps sold with submersible motors, prior to the
compliance date of any energy conservation standards for submersible
motors in subpart B of this part, the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency is that listed in table 2 of this
appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the speed at which
the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and
the motor horsepower of the pump being tested, or if a test
procedure for submersible motors is provided in subpart B to this
part, the represented nominal full load motor efficiency of the
motor with which the given pump model is being tested, as determined
in accordance with the applicable test procedure in subpart B to
this part and applicable representation procedures in 10 CFR part
429 and this part, may be used instead. Starting on the compliance
date of any energy conservation standards for submersible motors in
subpart B of this part, the default nominal full load submersible
motor efficiency may no longer be used. Instead, the represented
nominal full load motor efficiency of the motor with which the given
pump model is being tested, as determined in accordance with the
applicable test procedure in subpart B of this part and applicable
representation procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part, must be
used.
* * * * *
VI. Testing-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors and Controls
A. Scope. This section VI applies only to pumps sold with
electric motors, including single-phase induction motors, and
continuous or non-continuous controls, as well as to pumps sold with
inverter-only synchronous electric motors that are regulated by
DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation standards in subpart
B of this part (with or without controls). For the purposes of this
section VI, all references to ``driver input power'' in this section
VI or HI 40.6-2021 refer to the input power to the continuous or
non-continuous controls.
B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this
section VI. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section VI.
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6, shall be met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-
2021, including the applicable provisions of HI 9.6.1-2017 as
referenced in section 40.6.5.5.1 of HI 40.6-2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section
40.6.6.2.
* * * * *
VII. Calculation-Based Approach for Pumps Sold With Motors and Controls
A. Scope. This section VII can only be used in lieu of the test
method in section VI of this appendix to calculate the index for
pumps listed in sections VII.A.1, VII.A.2, VII.A.3, and VII.A.4 of
this appendix.
[[Page 17984]]
A.1. Pumps sold with motors regulated by DOE's energy
conservation standards for polyphase NEMA Design B electric motors
at Sec. 431.25(g) and continuous controls,
A.2. Pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous electric motors
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part,
A.3. SVIL pumps sold with small electric motors regulated by
DOE's energy conservation standards at Sec. 431.446 or with SNEMs
regulated by DOE's test procedure and/or energy conservation
standards in subpart B of this part (but including motors of such
varieties that are less than 0.25 hp) and continuous controls,
A.4. Pumps sold with submersible motors and continuous controls,
and
A.5. Pumps sold with motors not listed in sections VII.A.1,
VII.A.2, VII.A.3, and VII.A.4 of this appendix and pumps sold
without continuous controls, including pumps sold with non-
continuous controls, cannot use this section and must apply the test
method in section VI of this appendix.
B. Measurement Equipment. The requirements regarding measurement
equipment presented in section I.B of this appendix apply to this
section VII. In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated
motor, electrical measurement equipment shall meet the requirements
of section C.4.3 of HI 40.6-2021 (including the applicable
provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, as
referenced in section C.4.3 of HI 40.6), and motor power input shall
be determined according to section 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021 and
meet the requirements in Table 40.6.3.2.3 of HI 40.6-2021.
C. Test Conditions. The requirements regarding test conditions
presented in section I.C of this appendix apply to this section VII.
In addition, when testing pumps using a calibrated motor, the
conditions in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021, including the
applicable provisions of CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-
A, as referenced in section C.4.3.1 of HI 40.6-2021 shall be met.
D. Testing BEP for the Pump. Determine the best efficiency point
(BEP) of the pump as follows:
D.1. Adjust the flow by throttling the pump without changing the
speed of rotation of the pump and conduct the test at a minimum of
the following seven flow points: 40, 60, 75, 90, 100, 110, and 120
percent of the expected BEP flow rate of the pump at the nominal
speed of rotation, as specified in HI 40.6-2021, except section
40.6.5.3, and appendix B, including the applicable provisions of HI
9.6.1-2017, HI 9.6.6-2016, HI 9.8-2018, HI 14.1-14.2-2019, the HI
Engineering Data Book, ASME MFC-3M-2004, ASME MFC-5M-1985, ASME MFC-
8M-2001, ASME MFC-12M-2006, ASME MFC-16-2014, ASME MFC-22-2007, AWWA
E103-2015, CSA C390-10, IEEE 112-2017, IEEE 114-2010-A, ISO
1438:2017, ISO 2186:2007, ISO 2715:2017, ISO 3354:2008, ISO
3966:2020, ISO 5167-1:2003, ISO 5198:1987, ISO 6416:2017, and ISO
20456:2017, as referenced in HI 40.6-2021.
D.2. Determine the BEP flow rate as the flow rate at the
operating point of maximum pump efficiency on the pump efficiency
curve, as determined in accordance with section 40.6.6.3 of HI 40.6-
2021, where the pump efficiency is the ratio of the pump power
output divided by the pump power input, as specified in Table 40.6.2
of HI 40.6-2021, disregarding the calculations provided in section
40.6.6.2.
* * * * *
E.1.2 * * *
* * * * *
Lfull = motor losses at full load or, for inverter-
only synchronous electric motors, motor + inverter losses at full
load, as determined in accordance with section VII.E.1.2.1 of this
appendix (hp),
* * * * *
E.1.2.1 Determine the full load motor losses using the
appropriate motor efficiency value and horsepower as shown in the
following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.007
Where:
Lfull = motor losses at full load (hp), or for inverter-
only synchronous electric motors, motor + inverter losses at full
load,
MotorHP = the horsepower of the motor with which the pump model is
being tested (hp), and
[eta] motor,full = the represented nominal full load
motor efficiency (i.e., nameplate/DOE-certified value) or the
represented nominal full load motor + inverter efficiency or the
default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency as determined
in accordance with section VII.E.1.2.1.1 of this appendix (%).
E.1.2.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than inverter-only
synchronous electric motors or submersible motors, determine the
represented nominal full load motor efficiency as described in
section VII.E.1.2.1.1.1 of this appendix. For pumps sold with
inverter-only synchronous electric motors, determine the represented
nominal full load motor + inverter efficiency as described in
section VII.E.1.2.1.1.2 of this appendix. For pumps sold with
submersible motors, determine the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency as described in section VII.E.1.2.1.1.3
of this appendix.
E.1.2.1.1.1 For pumps sold with motors other than inverter-only
synchronous electric motors or submersible motors, the represented
nominal full load motor efficiency is that of the motor with which
the given pump model is being tested, as determined in accordance
with the DOE test procedure for electric motors at Sec. 431.16 or,
for SVIL, the DOE test procedure for small electric motors at Sec.
431.444 or the DOE test procedure for SNEMs in subpart B of this
part, as applicable (including for motors less than 0.25 hp), and,
if available, applicable representation procedures in 10 CFR part
429 and this part.
E.1.2.1.1.2 For pumps sold with inverter-only synchronous
electric motors, the represented nominal full load motor + inverter
efficiency is that of the motor with which the given pump model is
being tested, as determined in accordance with the DOE test
procedure for inverter-only synchronous electric motors in subpart B
of this part, and, if available, applicable representation
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part.
E.1.2.1.1.3 For pumps sold with submersible motors, prior to the
compliance date of any energy conservation standards for submersible
motors in subpart B of this part, the default nominal full load
submersible motor efficiency is that listed in table 2 of this
appendix, with the number of poles relevant to the speed at which
the pump is being tested (see section I.C.1 of this appendix) and
the motor horsepower of the pump being tested, or if a test
procedure for submersible motors is provided in subpart B of this
part, the represented nominal full load motor efficiency of the
motor with which the given pump model is being tested, as determined
in accordance with the applicable test procedure in subpart B of
this part and applicable representation procedures in 10 CFR part
429 and this part,
[[Page 17985]]
may be used instead. Starting on the compliance date of any energy
conservation standards for submersible motors in subpart B of this
part, the default nominal full load submersible motor efficiency may
no longer be used and instead the represented nominal full load
motor efficiency of the motor with which the given pump model is
being tested, as determined in accordance with the applicable test
procedure in subpart B of this part and applicable representation
procedures in 10 CFR part 429 and this part, must be used instead.
E.1.2.2 For load points corresponding to 25, 50, 75, and 100
percent of the BEP flow rate, determine the part load loss factor at
each load point as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.008
Where:
z i = the motor and control part load loss factor at load point i,
a,b,c = coefficients listed in either Table 4 of this appendix for
induction motors or Table 5 of this appendix for inverter-only
synchronous electric motors, based on the horsepower of the motor
with which the pump is being tested,
P i = the pump power input to the bare pump at load point
i, as determined in accordance with section VII.E.1.1 of this
appendix (hp),
MotorHP = the horsepower of the motor with which the pump is being
tested (hp),
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24MR23.009
Table 2--Default Nominal Full Load Submersible Motor Efficiency by Motor Horsepower and Pole
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Default nominal full load submersible motor
efficiency
Motor horsepower (hp) -----------------------------------------------------
2 poles 4 poles 6 poles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................................... 55 68 64
1.5....................................................... 66 70 72
2......................................................... 68 70 74
3......................................................... 70 75.5 75.5
5......................................................... 74 75.5 75.5
7.5....................................................... 68 74 72
10........................................................ 70 74 72
15........................................................ 72 75.5 74
20........................................................ 72 77 74
25........................................................ 74 78.5 77
30........................................................ 77 80 78.5
40........................................................ 78.5 81.5 81.5
50........................................................ 80 82.5 81.5
60........................................................ 81.5 84 82.5
75........................................................ 81.5 85.5 82.5
100....................................................... 81.5 84 82.5
125....................................................... 84 84 82.5
150....................................................... 84 85.5 85.5
200....................................................... 85.5 86.5 85.5
250....................................................... 86.5 86.5 85.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[[Page 17986]]
Table 4--Induction Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients for Section VII.E.1.2.2 of This
Appendix A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coefficients for induction motor and control
part load loss factor (zi)
Motor horsepower (hp) -----------------------------------------------
a b c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5............................................................. -0.4658 1.4965 0.5303
>5 and <=20..................................................... -1.3198 2.9551 0.1052
>20 and <=50.................................................... -1.5122 3.0777 0.1847
>50 and <=100................................................... -0.6629 2.1452 0.1952
>100............................................................ -0.7583 2.4538 0.2233
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5--Inverter-Only Synchronous Electric Motor and Control Part Load Loss Factor Equation Coefficients for
Section VII.E.1.2.2 of This Appendix A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coefficients for induction motor and control
part load loss factor (zi)
Motor horsepower (hp) -----------------------------------------------
a b c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=5............................................................. -0.0898 1.0251 0.0667
>5 and <=20..................................................... -0.1591 1.1683 -0.0085
>20 and <=50.................................................... -0.4071 1.4028 0.0055
>50 and <=100................................................... -0.3341 1.3377 -0.0023
>100............................................................ -0.0749 1.0864 -0.0096
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2023-05635 Filed 3-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
